Aims And Objectives:This study was conducted to compare the clinical assessment of impacted third molars of mandible with panaromic radiograph (OPG) and intraoral periapical radiograph (IOPA) and to assess the efficacy of IOPA and. Moreover, we corroborated the OPG and IOPA findings of impacted mandiblar third molar root apex to inferior alveolar canal.Materials and Methods:A total of 200 patients with pericoronitis were examined who were indicated for surgical extraction, among which 50 patients were selected for the study. All the patients underwent a radiographic survey with a digital OPG and IOPA of impacted mandibular third molars, along with clinical survey for anatomic relationship, type of impaction, space available, position in relation to second molar, number of roots, root curvature, and proximity of nerve canal. The data was subjected to statistical analysis. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 4.0.1 software was used for analyzing the collected data.Results:The study revealed that IOPA was more accurate in determining a majority of the factors affecting the third molar surgery, including relationship of the external oblique ridge (IOPA vs OPG = 96%:90%), anteroposterior relation with ramus (IOPA vs OPG = 70%:66%), vertical depth of impaction (IOPA vs OPG = 72%:68%), number of roots (P = 0.013), morphology of roots (IOPA vs OPG = 96%:90%); however, OPG was found to be accurate in evaluating the type of impaction (IOPA vs OPG = 88%:94%), canal relation, along with root of impacted molar (IOPA vs OPG = 74%:86%).Conclusion:To conclude, although IOPA has a marginal angle over OPG in assessing various parameters, only the number of roots have a greater accuracy (P < 0.0013) in IOPA than with OPG. However, the OPG is the better choice to be considered when the patient is associated with trismus.

Background:To evaluate the effectiveness of the supraomohyoid neck dissection in clinically N0 neck patients with squamous cell carcinoma of buccal mucosa and gingivobuccal sulcus.Materials and Methods:This was a prospective study of five patients with squamous cell carcinoma of gingivobuccal mucosa of oral cavity with clinically N0 neck, conducted over a period of 2 years from July 2007 to Oct 2009 in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Narayana Dental College and Hospital. The study was conducted in patients irrespective of age, sex, size, thickness, and type of differentiation of the lesion. All patients have clinically non-palpable lymphnodes (N0 neck), while patients with palpable lymphnodes, patients with previous surgery, and patients with previous radiotherapy were excluded from the study.Results:Level I was the commonest site of neck metastasis in our study. Among the five patients, two (40%) patients (case 2 and 3) had occult cervical metastasis (level IB nodes are histopathologically positive nodes) and the remaining three patients (60%) had no occult cervical metastasis. The recurrence rate was 20% for patients who received postoperative radiotherapy. There was no morbidity and postoperative dysfunction and the mortality rate was only 20% in our study.Conclusion:Supraomohyoid neck dissection is the therapeutic procedure in clinically N0 neck patients with squamous cell carcinoma of buccal mucosa and gingivobuccal sulcus of mandible. Supraomohyoid neck dissection, when indicated, contributes to the concept of less-invasive surgery and offers functional and aesthetic advantages without compromising the clearance with minimal morbidity.

Letter to the editorPhotobiomodulation and space closure A n article published in July 2021 by Al-Shafi et al reported the results of a split-mouth randomized clinical trial to examine the effects of light-emitting diode (LED) mediated photobiomodulation compared with no photobiomodulation on extraction space closure in adolescents and young adults. (Al-Shafi S, Pandis N, Darendeliler MA, Papadopoulou AK. Effect of light-emitting diode-mediated photobiomodulation on extraction space closure in adolescents and young adults: a split-mouth, randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2021;160:19-28).The article was informative and praised by most of us but we have come across certain doubts. In the introduction, the authors stated that "The present literature suggests that PBM therapy has the potential to accelerate tooth movement by as much as 30%, 8,13,14 " but none of the articles cited in support of that claim have arrived at the same conclusion.According to the CONSORT 2010 checklist a table showing baseline demographic and clinical characteristics for each group should be included, which was lacking in this article.For contact points, canine rotation, and anchorage measurements, the T0-T3 values for LED and control sides are incorrectly calculated in Table I. For example, at T0 and T3, the LED (A side) contact point distance was 6.31 mm and 2.87 mm, respectively. The difference

Cases with missing molars do need a well-executed treatment plan and a thorough knowledge of biomechanics to treat which usually leads to its prosthetic rehabilitation instead of orthodontic management by the orthodontists. Its orthodontic management is not only time consuming but also requires patience and proper treatment strategy involving right choice of appliance and auxiliaries to achieve the best possible results. Here in this case series we have tried to show different treatment modalities in cases with missing permanent molars leading to ideal post treatment outcomes.