Background: Golden proportion, recurrent esthetic dental proportion and golden percentage are the widely accepted tools to measure perceived mesiodistal width of maxillary anterior teeth. Our study was aimed to identify appropriate tool among the above mentioned proportion to measure perceived mesiodistal width.Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in National Academy of Medical Sciences, Bir Hospital, Nepalese Army Institute of Medical Sciences and Patan Academy of Health Sciences between March 2014 to March 2015.Sixty-three respondents were recruited in the study by the convenient sampling technique. Photographs of the maxillary anterior teeth were taken using digital single reflex camera with macrolens. Data analysis was done using SPSS version 17.0 and paired sample t- test was performed.Results: In our study the golden proportion was 14.28% between central and lateral incisor and 12.69% between canine and lateral incisor. Therefore, golden proportion in our scenario doesn’t exist. Recurrent esthetic dental proportion in female Aryans was 71 and 71 on left side and 71and 75 on right side. Golden percentage of respondents was near to values 11, 15, 22, 22, 15, and 12%.Conclusions: Golden percentage is an appropriate anterior tooth proportion which may serve as a guideline for the restoration of anterior tooth. RED proportion is applicable only in Mongoloid female population.

Myriads of materials have been used for replacement of missing teeth through implantation. The success of these materials depend on the ability to integrate with the host environment showing biological compatibility, mechanical compatibility, and morphological compatibility to the surrounding vital tissues. Certain materials have shown this promising property and have been used in dental implantology. With recent advances in technology, these materials are better able to improve fixation to bone through various surface modifications and bioengineering.

Aim:The study was carried to find a relationship between the postextraction stable landmark, the incisive papilla, and the most labial position of the maxillary central incisor teeth, which occurred in Nepalese population. Materials and methods:Casts of the subjects selected by nonprobability random sampling meeting the inclusion criteria were obtained. Each casts were standardized with respect to the occlusal plane and a photographic technique was used to measure the distance from the tangent of the labial surface of the central incisors to the posterior border of the incisive papilla. The measurements were made using Adobe Photoshop and results were analyzed by using appropriate statistical methods. Most appropriate software (SPSS) for the purpose was used to generate all desired values. Results:The data obtained suggested that the distance from the labial surface of maxillary central incisors to the posterior border of the incisive papilla ranged from 9 to 15.9 mm with a mean of 11.59 mm (SD 1.3). Various other results were also found after evaluation of the arch forms in relation to sex and race. Conclusion:Within the limitations of the study, these results suggested that there is a relationship between the maxillary central incisors and the incisive papilla aiding in the anteroposterior positioning of the anterior tooth.The clinical relevance of the study lies in application of the incisive papilla as a starting point in the preliminary location of

Osseointegration of titanium dental implants is the most important clinical parameter for an implant to be successful. One of most biocompatible material, titanium can be made to affix fast on to host bone via various modification of its surface. Machined and smooth titanium implant osseointegrate into living bone tissue but with a roughened surface, this is much more predictable as well as promising clinically. Surface modification allows for an increase in the surface area on to which the osteoblasts easily start laying bone. So, there have been various methods to roughen the surface of titanium implants. The article describes various methods used for modifying the surfaces of dental implants, giving a note on their clinical efficacy as well as advantages and disadvantages of these methods.