Clinical Evaluation of Flowable Composite Materials in Permanent Molars Small Class I Restorations: 3-Year Double Blind Clinical Study.

This study evaluated the 3-year clinical performance of four different flowable composite materials used in Small Class I restorations in permanent molars. This double-blinded, clinical study analyzed 229 Small Class I restorations/103 children at baseline, 12, 24, and 36 months with modified United States Public Health Services (USPHS) criteria. The tested flowable materials were Voco Grandio Flow + Voco Solobond M, Vivadent Tetric EvoFlow + Vivadent Excite, Dentsply X-Flow + Dentsply Prime&Bond NT, and 3M ESPE Filtek Supreme XT Flow + 3M ESPE Scotchbond Universal. The retention and marginal adaptation rates were highest for Grandio Flow and X Flow materials after 36 months, resulting in the highest score of clinical acceptability at 95.3% and 97.6%, respectively. The Tetric EvoFlow and Filtek Supreme XT Flow had the same retention rate after 36 months at 88.1%. Statistical significance was found in Grandio flow material in postoperative sensitivity criteria (p = 0.021). Tetric EvoFlow showed statistical differences in retention (p = 0.01), color match (p = 0.004), and marginal adaptation (p = 0.042). Filtek Supreme showed statistical differences in retention (p = 0.01) and marginal adaptation (p < 0.001). The flowable composite materials showed excellent clinical efficacy after 36 months of their clinical usage. There was no difference among the tested flowable composite materials quality in Small Class I restorations over time.

Differences in self-reported symptoms in patients with chronic odontogenic and non-odontogenic rhinosinusitis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the possible differences in self-reported symptoms between patients with chronic odontogenic rhinosinusitis (CORS) and patients with chronic non-odontogenic rhinosinusitis (CnORS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 64 patients diagnosed with chronic rhinosinusitis according to EPOS guidelines. 32 patients had CORS, and the control group were 32 patients with CnORS. Patients were matched according to gender and age. All the patients underwent a CT scan evaluated by a radiologist, and were evaluated by an oral surgeon and otorhinolaryngologist before being assigned to one of the groups. The severity of the symptoms was assessed through questioners SNOT-22 (sino-nasal outcome test) and VAS (visual analogue scale) symptom score. Kolmogorov-Smirnov's, Fisher's and Mann-Whitney U test were used in the statistical analysis of the data. RESULTS: People with CORS show similar symptomatology on SNOT-22 score to patients with CnORS, with no significant statistical difference between any of the SNOT-22 symptoms. VAS symptom score showed that odontogenic group had a significantly higher score for fever (p = .004) and halitosis (p = .003). CONCLUSION: Halitosis and fever might be the most important symptoms in differentiating between CORS and CnORS symptomatology. Better diagnostic tools, such as VAS symptom score might help medical professionals to be quicker at recognizing CORS specific symptomatology, and help them treat the disease as early and adequately as possible.

Comorbidity and multimorbidity in patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder: similarities and differencies.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for better understanding and research of the comorbidity structure in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of somatic and psychiatric comorbidity in schizophrenia and bipolar affective disorder treated at the University Hospital Centre Zagreb. METHOD: This retrospective study compares the prevalence of comorbid diagnosis of somatic and psychiatric disorders in 192 patients with schizophrenia and 97 patients with bipolar disorder. The diagnoses were established according to ICD-10 criteria. The data were collected from hospital medical documentation. RESULTS: Patients with bipolar disorder had more both somatic (67.1% vs. 50.6%) and psychiatric (29.9% vs. 10.9%) comorbidity than patients with schizophrenia. The three most prevalent somatic comorbidites in patients with bipolar disorders were cardiovascular (22.6%), endocrinological (22.6%), and gastrointestinal (16.4%) disorders while neurological (11.4%), gastrointestinal (10.9%) and endocrinological (9.3%) disorders were the most frequent in patients with schizophrenia. CONCLUSION: The exact prevalence and nature of the somatic and psychiatric comorbidity in patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder is still unclear and further research is needed.