Periodontal diseases: to protect or not to protect is the question?

For decades, investigations have identified local and systemic humoral immune responses to microorganisms comprising the supra- and subgingival biofilms in the oral cavity. Inflammation and tissue destruction in the periodontium are accompanied by alterations in the quantity, quality, and specificity of antibody. The conundrum in this scenario is the existence of a substantial plasma cell infiltrate at sites of periodontal lesions and a seemingly robust antibody response in the oral cavity and the serum, apparently coincident with progressing disease. Consequently, much effort has been expended to elucidate the critical characteristics of protective humoral responses and to develop strategies for enhancing these unique features. We and others have conducted studies attempting to distinguish disease susceptibility associated with: i) variations in response levels significantly increased to some species with disease, minimal response to others; ii) functional comparisons of antibody subclass differences, genetic regulation, and maturation of responses; iii) microbial and antigenic specificity of the antibody focus on specific pathogens and identification of selected antigens as targets for immunoprotection; and, iv) kinetics of responses during disease and therapeutic interventions linking immune changes with infection and as a measure of treatment success. This report summarizes varied research designs and results, to provide a profile of antibody in health, gingivitis, and periodontitis. These profiles may be used to provide a framework focusing on the humoral response to commensal microorganisms and likely pathogens, as they emerge in the biofilm--etiologic for or in response to disease processes. Models for antibody as a diagnostic adjunct and for predicting protective antibody responses are suggested. These concepts are likely relevant for considering vaccine approaches to periodontitis.     

The “Butterfly Effect” and Its Correlation to the Direction of the Fracture Line in Root Dentin

IntroductionThe butterfly effect is an optical phenomenon and is related to the presence of sclerotic dentin in the roots. The unique pattern of sclerotic dentin formation produces a characteristic butterfly shape in transverse sections of the roots. The objective of this study was to evaluate the direction of the fracture line in roots that exhibit the butterfly effect.MethodsThirty single-rooted premolars with oval-shaped roots were decoronated and embedded in acrylic blocks and subjected to vertical force under a universal testing machine (HPBSD; Tec-Sol India, Chennai, India). Fractured roots were examined under a stereomicroscope (Model no. 080772; Lawrence and Mayo, Mumbai, India) at ×10 magnification to determine the location and direction of the fracture line. To evaluate the correlation between the direction of sclerotic dentin and the direction of the fracture line, teeth were sectioned and observed under a stereomicroscope at ×20 and ×40 magnification. The correlation was analyzed using the Fisher exact test (P < .05 for the coronal and apical thirds and P > .05 for the middle third).ResultsSclerotic dentin was observed more in the apical area and less in the coronal third of the root. The correlation between the direction of sclerotic dentin and the direction of the fracture line was statistically significant in the coronal and apical thirds of the root.ConclusionsThe vertical root fracture that runs buccolingually is correlated to the harder sclerotic dentin present in the mesiodistal direction.     

Is the 3-D CT model useful to our anaesthetists?

A case report of a nasal spur detected on pre-operative 3-D Cad-Cam models illustrating the use of these models in predicting and preventing anaesthetic difficulties.     

Application of the Zürich biofilm model to problems of cariology

The term biofilm is increasingly replacing 'plaque' in the literature, but concepts and existing paradigms are changing much more slowly. There is little doubt that biofilm research will lead to more realistic perception and interpretation of the physiology and pathogenicity of microorganisms colonizing plaques in the oral cavity. There is clear evidence that the genotypic and phenotypic expression profiles of biofilm and planktonic bacteria are different. Several techniques are available today to study multispecies biofilms of oral bacteria, each having its particular advantages and weaknesses. We describe a biofilm model developed in Zürich and demonstrate a number of applications with direct or indirect impact on prophylactic dentistry: spatial arrangement and associative behavior of various species in biofilms; multiplex fluorescent in situ hybridization analysis of oral bacteria in biofilms; use of the biofilm model to predict in vivo efficacy of antimicrobials reliably; mass transport in biofilms; de- and remineralization of enamel exposed to biofilms in vitro. The potential of biofilm experimentation in oral biology has certainly not yet been fully exploited and dozens of possible interesting applications could be investigated. The overall physiological parameters of multispecies biofilms can be measured quite accurately, but it is still impossible to assess in toto the multitude of interactions taking place in such complex systems. What can and should be done is to test hypotheses stemming from experiments with planktonic cells in monospecies cultures. In particular, it will be interesting to investigate the relevance to biofilm composition and metabolism of specific gene products by using appropriate bacterial mutants.     

The Eigenfactor™ Score in highly specific medical fields: the dental model

We sought to compare the Eigenfactor Score? journal rank with the journal Impact Factor over five years, and to identify variables that may influence the ranking differences between the two metrics. Datasets were retrieved from the Thomson Reuters(?) and Eigenfactor Score? Web sites. Dentistry was identified as the most specific medical specialty. Variables were retrieved from the selected journals to be included in a regression linear model. Among the 46 dental journals included in the analysis, striking variations in ranks were observed according to the metric used. The Bland-Altman plot showed a poor agreement between the metrics. The multivariate analysis indicates that the number of original research articles, the number of reviews, the self-citations, and the citing time may explain the differences between ranks. The Eigenfactor Score? seems to better capture the prestige of a journal than the Impact Factor. In medicine, the bibliometric indicators should focus not only on the overall medical field but also on specialized disciplinary fields. Distinct measures are needed to better describe the scientific impact of specialized medical publications.