Abstract

Objectives: to perform a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of different molar intrusion methods used in the treatment of anterior open bite patients, to explore the changes that occur in the vertical facial morphology and mandibular rotation.

Search methods: Electronic databases were searched up to April, 2016 in (CENTRAL-Cochrane register of controlled trials, PubMed and LILACS). Grey literature was also searched electronically through Google Scholar. Hand searching was done in the central library in Cairo University and the Cairo Dental Journal (CDJ) as well as high impact factor journals in the field (AJODO, EJO and The Angle Orthodontist). Language was restricted to English.

Results: Twenty articles were eligible for the descriptive analysis, but only 4 were eligible for the quantitative analysis. Quality assessment of the included articles showed moderate to high quality. Meta-analysis using the fixed effect model .

Conclusion: A significant improvement in overbite was found in Frankel-4 appliance group about 2 mm greater than the control group. A significant improvement in overbite was found in MPBB group about 1 mm greater than the SPBB group. There is no enough evidence in the orthodontic literature regarding to the most efficient molar intrusion method used for anterior open bite treatment in adults.

Abstract

Objectives: Mandibular foramen (MF) is an anatomical landmark for inferior alveolar nerve block and many surgical procedures like sagittal split osteotomies. Sagittal split osteotomies are done to reposition the mandible in prognathism and retroganthism. Variations in the position of mandibular foramen and the presence of accessory mandibular foramina are the main reasons accounting for the failure rate of this technique. The present study will be designed to determine variations in mandibular foramen using cone beam tomography in Egyptian population.

Method: 300 cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were grouped according to sex, and symmetry between right and left sides into two groups. Group I: males& female and group II: right & left sides. Panoramic images were reconstructed from cone beam computed tomography scans and evaluated using Blue sky software. The exact location of mandibular foramen at the two sides of the mandible was determined in relation to anterior border &posterior border of ramus, mandibular base, and mandibular notch. The recorded data will be collected, tabulated and statistically analyzed by SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences).

Results: This study showed bilateral asymmetry between right and left sides, no significant difference between 2 sides of the mandible. There was high significant difference in the distance from MF to mandibular base between males and females. No significant difference in other parameters relative to vertical and horizontal dimensions of mandibular ramus.

Conclusions: All parameters related to the position of mandibular foramen in vertical and horizontal dimensions of mandibular ramus (MF-MB, (MF-MN), (PB-MF), and (AB-MF) were symmetrical in the right and left sides. The distance from mandibular foramen to mandibular base (MF-MB) was significantly different between males and females.

Abstract:

Introduction: Despite global efforts to contain the illness, COVID-19 continues to have severe health, life, and economic repercussions; thus, maintaining vaccine development is mandatory. Different directions concerning COVID-19 vaccines have emerged as a result of the vaccine’s unpredictability.

Aims: To study the determinants of the attitudes of healthcare workers (HCWs) to receiving or refusing to receive the vaccine.

Methods: The current study adopted an interviewed questionnaire between June and August 2021. A total of 341 HCWs currently working at Assiut University hospitals offered to receive the vaccine were included.

Results: Only half of the HCWs (42%) accepted the COVID-19 vaccine. The most common reason that motivated the HCWs was being more susceptible than others to infection (71.8%). On other hand, the common reasons for refusing included: previously contracted the virus (64.8%); did not have time (58.8%); warned by a doctor not to take it (53.8%). Nearly one-third of nonaccepting HCWs depended on television, the Internet, and friends who refused the vaccine for information (p < 0.05). In the final multivariate regression model, there were six significant predictors: sex, job category, chronic disease, being vaccinated for influenza, and using Assiut University hospital staff and the Ministry of Health as sources of information (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: Misinformation and negative conceptions are still barriers against achieving the desired rate of vaccination, especially for vulnerable groups such as HCWs.

Abstract

Background The Coronavirus 2019 is a pandemic that has spread worldwide, threatening human health. The main cause of death in patients with COVID-19 is a systemic pro-infammatory mechanism that quickly progresses to acute respiratory distress syndrome. Hematological ratios as afordable indicators of infammatory response were studied in COVID-19 patients. The study aimed to study the importance of the blood cell indexes of the systemic infammatory response, as the Aggregate Index of Systemic Infammation (AISI), neutrophils lymphocyte to platelet ratio (NLPR), systemic immuneinfammation index (SII) and, systemic infammation response index (SIRI) in predicting intensive care unit (ICU) admission of COVID-19 patients.

Methods 495 COVID-19 patients managed in four tertiary centers; divided into non-ICU and ICU groups.

Results Total leucocyte count (TLC), AISI, NLPR, SII, and SIRI were more elevated in the ICU group (P<0.001 for all except AMC P=0.006), while this group had less absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) (P=0.047). We estimated the optimal cut-of values of the hematological ratio; AISI (729), NLPR (0.0195), SII (1346), and SIRI (2.5). SII had the highest specifcity (95.6%), while NLPR had the highest sensitivity (61.3%). Age, AISI, CRP, D-dimer, and oxygen aid were the independent predictors for ICU admission in COVID-19 in multivariate logistic regression.

Conclusion AISI is a predictor for severity and ICU admission in COVID-19 patients, SII is a predictor of survival, while NLPR and SIRI have an additive role that needs further evaluation. 

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Piezocision-assisted orthodontics (PAO) is considered one of the modern techniques aiming at reducing the treatment time and overcoming some limitations of orthodontic treatment. The use of piezocision as an adjunct in the treatment of posterior crossbite is limited, so additional research in this area is required.

AIM: To three-dimensionally compare the skeletal and dental effects produced by piezocision-assisted rapid maxillary expansion (PARME) and conventional rapid maxillary expansion (RME) using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective controlled study comprised 14 consecutive non-syndromic patients with posterior crossbite. In 7 patients (mean age = 16.1 ± 0.3 years), PARME was used to correct the crossbite; whereas in the remaining 7 (mean age = 15.9 ± 0.5 years), RME was done. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were performed before expansion (T1) and 3 months later after expansion (T2) to compare the skeletal and dental effects produced by the two expansion techniques. Transverse skeletal, dentolinear, and dentoangular variables at the level of maxillary first and second premolars and maxillary first molars were measured and compared within and between groups using the appropriate statistical test.

RESULTS: For the transverse skeletal variables, PARME showed a non-significant increase; whereas, RME showed a significant increase. Regarding the dentolinear measurements, a significant increase in coronal widths and an insignificant increase in apical widths was seen in PARME, whereas, the RME showed a non-significant increase for both coronal and apical widths. Non-significant decreases (protrusion of teeth) in the dentoangular measurements were seen in both groups. Between-group comparisons showed a non-significant difference except for the dentolinear coronal widths.

CONCLUSION: PARME is effective in treating posterior crossbite. Because of the more dental expansion produced by PARME as compared to the conventional RME, PARME should be limited only to mild or moderate not severe forms of palatal constriction. The available evidence regarding the effectiveness of corticotomy- and/or piezocision-assisted maxillary expansion for correction of posterior crossbite is limited and inadequate.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To elucidate the positional and dimensional temporomandibular joint (TMJ) changes after correction of posterior crossbite in growing patients.

Materials and Methods: A systematic unrestricted search was done in six databases until June 27, 2017. A manual search in the reference lists of the included studies and gray literature was also performed. The eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials and prospective nonrandomized controlled clinical trials and a sample of growing subjects with posterior crossbite that required maxillary expansion. Risk of bias assessment was performed using Cochrane’s Risk of Bias Tool. The literature search, study inclusion, risk of bias assessment, evaluation of quality of evidence (GRADE), and data extraction were performed by two reviewers independently.

Results: Only two articles were finally eligible to be included in the qualitative analysis. Both studies were RCTs and were assessed as having unclear risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible since one study used cone-beam computed tomography as an assessment tool while the other used ultrasonography. One study reported significant reduction in the condylar positional difference between centric and habitual occlusion in the treatment group, while no spontaneous correction of condylar asymmetric position occurred in the control group. The other study reported minor changes of condylar position in both treatment and control groups.

Conclusions: The current available data provide insufficient and weak evidence to form a solid and firm conclusion. There is poor, very low-quality evidence regarding the positional and dimensional effects of posterior crossbite correction on the TMJs. (Angle Orthod. 2018;88:638–648.)