Aim:This study evaluated and compared two impression techniques in terms of their dimensional accuracies to reproduce implant positions on working casts.Materials and Methods:A master model was designed to simulate a clinical situation. Impressions were made using four techniques: (1) Stock open tray (SOT) technique; (2) stock closed tray (SCT) technique; (3) custom open tray (COT) technique; and (3) custom closed tray (CCT) technique. Reference points on the hexagonal silhouette of the implant on master model and onto the analogs of the obtained master casts were compared after using the four impression techniques. Measurements were made using an optical microscope, capable of recording under 50x magnifications. The means and standard deviations of all the groups and subgroups were calculated and statically analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test.Results:The open tray impressions showed significantly less variation from the master model and all the techniques studied were comparable.Conclusion:All the techniques studied shown some distortion. COT showed the most accurate results of all the techniques.

No abstract

A rare case of birooted primary maxillary central incisor is reported. A 5-year-old male patient reported with carious maxillary primary anterior teeth. Radiographic examination incidentally revealed root bifurcation in primary maxillary central incisors bilaterally. This represents a rare finding. There are few cases that have reported birooted permanent incisors, but there is no case reported till date with birooted primary incisors. This report discusses the findings in the context of the available literature. The possible etiology and the need for careful assessment prior to root canal therapy are highlighted.How to cite this article Jajoo SS. Primary Maxillary Bilateral Central Incisors with Two Roots. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2017;10(3):309-312.

Objective: The study was aimed to compare the clinical performance of newer chemo-mechanical caries removal system and conventional cavity preparation technique in children. Study Design: Forty primary molars or first permanent molars of twenty children between the age groups of seven to ten years were selected randomly and divided into two groups of twenty teeth each: Group I was treated by the mechanical method and Group II with Brix 3000 gel method. The efficacy, time taken, and the pain threshold were evaluated during the caries removal by Ericson D et al. scale, stopwatch and modified visual analog scale, respectively. The preferred choice of treatment was assessed using a questionnaire. Results: The comparison between the time taken by the two methods showed a significant difference (P < 0.05). The caries removal efficacy indicated a significant difference as well ( P < 0.05). The pain rating results indicated a notable difference in the mean Visual Analogue Scale score (P = 0.001). The comparison between the two choices of treatment indicated a significant difference at p≤0.05. Conclusion: It was concluded that airotor was efficient in caries removal and while Brix 300 had lower pain rating and better patient acceptance.

No abstract