Efficacy and safety of different interventions to accelerate maxillary canine retraction following premolar extraction: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Decreasing orthodontic treatment duration is at the forefront of innovation for clinical orthodontics. This network meta-analysis aimed to determine the relative efficacy and safety of treatments for accelerated orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) in patients undergoing extraction of maxillary first premolars followed by canine retraction in any orthodontic setting. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL and SCOPUS were searched (from inception to 20 April 2020). Study selection and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were meta-analysed to estimate the rate of tooth movement, 95% credible interval and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) in the first 3 months following the application of the adjunctive accelerative method. Eligible RCTs were assessed by Cochrane risk of bias tool, and quality of evidence was assessed by GRADE approach, obtained from CINeMA web application. Interventions were ranked for efficacy and reviewed for safety. Nineteen studies pertaining to eight interventions, with data from 415 patients were included. Quality of evidence was very low to moderate. Very low-to low-quality evidence suggests that corticotomy is an efficacious and safe adjunctive treatment to accelerate OTM in comparison with conventional treatment in the first 2 months of treatment. Low-quality evidence suggests that piezocision and micro-osteoperforations (MOP) are efficacious and safe adjunctive treatments only in the first month of treatment. Frequent MOP in conjunction with low-level laser therapy appeared to be an efficacious and safe adjunctive treatment only in the first month following its initial application but not thereafter.

Interventions for preventing osteoradionecrosis of the jaws in adults receiving head and neck radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Osteoradionecrosis (ORN) of the jaws is among the most serious oral complications of head and neck cancer radiotherapy, arising from radiation-induced fibro-atrophic tissue injury, manifested by necrosis of osseous tissues and failure to heal, often secondary to operative interventions in the oral cavity. It is associated with considerable morbidity and has important quality of life ramifications. Since ORN is very difficult to treat effectively, preventive measures to limit the onset of this disease are needed; however, the effects of various preventive interventions has not been adequately quantified. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions for preventing ORN of the jaws in adult patients with head and neck cancer undergoing curative or adjuvant (i.e. non-palliative) radiotherapy. SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 5 November 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 10) in the Cochrane Library (searched 5 November 2019), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 5 November 2019), Embase Ovid (1980 to 5 November 2019), Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) Ovid (1985 to 5 November 2019), Scopus (1966 to 5 November 2019), Proquest Dissertations and Theses International (1861 to 5 November 2019) and Web of Science Conference Proceedings (1990 to 5 November 2019). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of adult patients 18 years or older with head and neck cancer who had undergone curative or adjuvant radiotherapy to the head and neck, who had received an intervention to prevent the onset of ORN. Eligible patients were those subjected to pre- or post-irradiation dental evaluation. Management of these patients was to be with interventions independent of their cancer therapy, including but not limited to local, systemic, or behavioural interventions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials from search results, assessed risk of bias, and extracted relevant data for inclusion in the review. Authors of included studies were contacted to request missing data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: Four studies were identified that met pre-determined eligibility criteria, evaluating a total of 342 adults. From the four studies, all assessed as at high risk of bias, three broad interventions were identified that may potentially reduce the risk of ORN development: one study showed no reduction in ORN when using platelet-rich plasma placed in the extraction sockets of prophylactically removed healthy mandibular molar teeth prior to radiotherapy (odds ratio (OR) 3.32, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 19.09; one trial, 44 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Another study involved comparing fluoride gel and high-content fluoride toothpaste (1350 parts per million (ppm)) in prevention of post-radiation caries, and found no difference between their use as no cases of ORN were reported (one trial, 220 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The other two studies involved the use of perioperative hyperbaric oxygen (HBO) therapy and antibiotics. One study showed that treatment with HBO caused a reduction in the development of ORN in comparison to patients treated with antibiotics following dental extractions (risk ratio (RR) 0.18, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.76; one trial, 74 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Another study found no difference between combined HBO and antibiotics compared to antibiotics alone prior to dental implant placement (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.14 to 65.16; one trial, 26 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Adverse effects of the different interventions were not reported clearly or were not important. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Given the suboptimal reporting and inadequate sample sizes of the included studies, evidence regarding the interventions evaluated by the trials included in this review is uncertain. More well-designed RCTs with larger samples are required to make conclusive statements regarding the efficacy of these interventions.

Clinical features of HTLV-1-associated myelopathy/tropical spastic paraparesis (HAM/TSP) in northeast Iran.

This study aimed to introduce clinical manifestations of patients in northeast Iran with HTLV-1-associated myelopathy/tropical spastic paraparesis (HAM/TSP) and describe the epidemiological features, as well as risk factors for HTLV-1 infection. This is a cross-sectional study of HTLV-1 infected cases and HAM/TSP patients referred by outpatient neurology clinics as well as Mashhad Blood Transfusion Center from 2005 to 2010. The study comprises 513 cases, including 358 healthy carriers (HCs) and 145 HAM/TSP patients. The majority of carriers were male (73.5%), whereas 67.6% of HAM/TSP sufferers were female (P < 0.001). The mean age of HAM/TSP patients and HCs was 45.9 ± 13.6 and 39.5 ± 11.58 years, respectively (P < 0.001). The history of transfusion, surgery, hospitalization and cupping was observed in a significant greater number of HAM/TSP patients than the HCs (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001 and P = 0.029, respectively). Gait disturbance was the most common complaint in HAM/TSP patients (72.4%). This research develops an HTLV-1 data registry in an endemic area such as Mashhad which can serve useful purposes, including evaluation of clinical and laboratory characteristics of HAM/TSP patients and epidemiological data of HTLV-1-infected cases.

Efficacy of bacteriophage treatment on Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilms.

INTRODUCTION: Bacterial viruses (phages) have been used successfully in the treatment of animal and human bacterial infections. This study examined the potential use of phage therapy against Pseudomonas aeruginosa strain PA14 biofilms in a root canal model. METHODS: Part 1: The 24-hour and 96-hour PA14 biofilms grown in microplates were treated with phages identified as possessing potential biofilm-degrading activities, and the post-treatment bacterial biomass was quantified by using crystal violet staining. Part 2: The 24-hour and 96-hour PA14 biofilms grown in prepared root canals of extracted human mandibular incisors were treated with phages identified with potential biofilm-degrading activities. Post-treatment intracanal samples were taken by using paper points and round burs to assess phage and bacterial counts. RESULTS: Part 1: We identified 2 phages (JBD4 and JBD44a) with putative biofilm-degrading activities. Treatment of PA14 biofilms with these phages produced a significant reduction in the mean percentage of biomass in 24-hour (P< .05) and 96-hour (P= .08) biofilms. Part 2: In 24-hour and 96-hour PA14 biofilms in a root canal model, no significant difference was found in the number of colony-forming units after phage treatment (P> .05). CONCLUSIONS: Phage application significantly reduced the biomass of 24-hour and 96-hour PA14 biofilms grown on microplates but did not produce significant reduction of 24-hour or 96-hour PA14 biofilms grown in the extracted tooth model.

The application of ozone in dentistry: a systematic review of literature.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To systematically review the clinical application and remineralization potentials of ozone in dentistry; (2) To summarize the available in vitro applications of ozone in dentistry. SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, etc. (up to April 2007). STUDY SELECTION: In vitro or in vivo English language publications, original studies, and reviews were included. Conference papers, abstracts, and posters were excluded. RESULTS: In vitro: Good evidence of ozone biocompatibility with human oral epithelial cells, gingival fibroblast, and periodontal cells; Conflicting evidence of antimicrobial efficacy of ozone but some evidence that ozone is effective in removing the microorganisms from dental unit water lines, the oral cavity, and dentures; Conflicting evidence for the application of ozone in endodontics; Insufficient evidence for the application of ozone in oral surgery and implantology; Good evidence of the prophylactic application of ozone in restorative dentistry prior to etching and the placement of dental sealants and restorations. In vivo: Despite the promising in vitro evidence, the clinical application of ozone in dentistry (so far in management of dental and root caries) has not achieved a strong level of efficacy and cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: While laboratory studies suggest a promising potential of ozone in dentistry, this has not been fully realised in clinical studies to date. More well designed and conducted double-blind randomised clinical trials with adequate sample size, limited or no loss to follow up, and carefully standardised methods of measurement and analyses are needed to evaluate the possible use of ozone as a treatment modality in dentistry.