Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen

Prof. Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

10Years (2017-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PTPrakan Thanasrisuebwong
Prakan Thanasrisuebwong
SKSirichai Kiattavorncharoen
Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen
RSRudee Surarit
Rudee Surarit
CPChareerut Phruksaniyom
Chareerut Phruksaniyom
NRNisarat Ruangsawasdi
Nisarat Ruangsawasdi
The biological benefits of using two fractions derived from injectable platelet-rich fibrin (i-PRF) in bone regeneration remain unclear. Thus, the current study examined two fractionation protocols producing yellow i-PRF and red i-PRF on periodontal ligament stem cells (PDLSCs). The i-PRF samples from five donors were harvested from two different levels, with and without a buffy coat layer, to obtain red and yellow i-PRF, respectively. The PDLSCs were isolated and characterized before their experimental use. The culture medium in each assay was loaded with 20% of the conditioned medium containing the factors released from the red and yellow i-PRF. Cell proliferation and cell migration were determined with an MTT and trans-well assay, respectively. Osteogenic differentiation was investigated using alkaline phosphatase and Alizarin red staining. The efficiency of both i-PRFs was statistically compared. We found that the factors released from the red i-PRF had a greater effect on cell proliferation and cell migration. Moreover, the factors released from the yellow i-PRF stimulated PDLSC osteogenic differentiation earlier compared with the red i-PRF. These data suggest that the red i-PRF might be suitable for using in bone regeneration because it induced the mobilization and growth of bone regenerative cells without inducing premature mineralization.

11 November 2021 in Sensors
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NSNattapong Sirintawat
Nattapong Sirintawat
TLTanyaporn Leelaratrungruang
Tanyaporn Leelaratrungruang
PPPongsakorn Poovarodom
Pongsakorn Poovarodom
SKSirichai Kiattavorncharoen
Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen
PAParinya Amornsettachai
Parinya Amornsettachai
This study aimed to investigate and compare the reliability and accuracy of tooth shade selection in the model using 30 milled crowns via five methods: (1) digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) camera with twin flash (TF) and polarized filter (DSLR + TF), (2) DSLR camera with a ring flash (RF) and polarized filter (DSLR + RF), (3) smartphone camera with light corrector and polarized filter (SMART), (4) intraoral scanner (IOS), and (5) spectrophotometer (SPEC). These methods were compared with the control group or manufacturer’s shade. The CIE Lab values (L, a, and b values) were obtained from five of the methods to indicate the color of the tooth. Adobe Photoshop was used to generate CIE Lab values from the digital photographs. The reliability was calculated from the intraclass correlation based on two repetitions. The accuracy was calculated from; (a) ΔE calculated by the formula comparing each method to the control group, (b) study and control groups were analyzed by using the Kruskal–Wallis test, and (c) the relationship between study and control groups were calculated using Spearman’s correlation. The reliability of the intraclass correlation of L, a, and b values obtained from the five methods showed satisfactory correlations ranging from 0.732–0.996, 0.887–0.994, and 0.884–0.999, respectively. The ΔE from all groups had statistically significant differences when compared to the border of clinical acceptance (ΔE = 6.8). The ΔE from DSLR + TF, DSLR + RF, SMART, and SPEC were higher than clinical acceptance (ΔE > 6.8), whereas the ΔE from IOS was 5.96 and all of the L, a, and b values were not statistically significantly different from the manufacturer’s shade (p < 0.01). The ΔE of the DSLR + RF group showed the least accuracy (ΔE = 19.98), whereas the ∆E of DSLR + TF, SMART, and SPEC showed similar accuracy ∆E (ΔE = 10.90, 10.57, and 11.57, respectively). The DSLR camera combined with a ring flash system and polarized filter provided the least accuracy. The intraoral scanner provided the highest accuracy. However, tooth shade selection deserves the combination of various techniques and a professional learning curve to establish the most accurate outcome.

1 January 2020 in Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CSChollathit Sugragan
Chollathit Sugragan
NSNattapong Sirintawat
Nattapong Sirintawat
SKSirichai Kiattavorncharoen
Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen
LKLee Kian Khoo
Lee Kian Khoo
KKKumar Kc
Kumar Kc
NWNatthamet Wongsirichat
Natthamet Wongsirichat
Sugragan C, et al. J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2020 Oct;20(5):281-291. https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2020.20.5.281

20 April 2022 in Materials
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PTPisut Thangwarawut
Pisut Thangwarawut
PAPokpong Amornvit
Pokpong Amornvit
Dinesh RokayaDinesh Rokaya
Dinesh Rokaya
SKSirichai Kiattavorncharoen
Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen
This research aimed to compare the accuracy of dental implant placement among three types of surgical guide: metal sleeve with key handle (Nobel guide, Nobel Biocare, Göteborg, Sweden), metal sleeve without key handle, and non-sleeve without key handle (Dentium full guide kit, Dentium Co., Seoul, Korea) when placing the implant in different bone inclinations. A total of 72 polyurethane bone models were fabricated in different inclinations (0°, 45°, and 60°). The dental implants were placed in bone models following the company’s recommendations. After dental implants were installed, the digital scans were done by an extraoral scanner. The deviations of the dental implant position were evaluated by superimposition between post-implant placement and reference model by using GOM inspect software. The deviation measurement was shown in 5 parameters: angular deviation, 3D deviation at the crest, 3D deviation at the apex, lateral linear deviation, and vertical linear deviation. The data were analyzed using One-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests at a significance level of 0.05. The accuracy of the dental implant position was not significantly influenced by the difference in the surgical guide system (p > 0.05). There were significant differences between placed and planned implant positions in the different inclinations of the bone. A significant difference was found in all parameters of 0° and 60° bone inclinations (p < 0.05). At 0° and 45°, angulated bone showed significant differences except in 3D deviation at the apex. Between 45° and 60° were significant differences only in angular deviation. Within the limitations of this study, the accuracy of implant placement among three types of surgical guides (Non-sleeve without key handle, Metal sleeve without key handle, and Metal sleeve with key handle) from two companies (Dentium and Nobel Biocare) was similar. Hence, the operators can choose the surgical guide system according to their preference. The inclination of bone can influence the angulation of dental implants.

1 January 2018 in Journal of Dental Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SSSam Sovatdy
Sam Sovatdy
CVChakorn Vorakulpipat
Chakorn Vorakulpipat
SKSirichai Kiattavorncharoen
Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen
CSChavengkiat Saengsirinavin
Chavengkiat Saengsirinavin
NWNatthamet Wongsirichat
Natthamet Wongsirichat
Sovatdy S, et al. J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2018 Dec;18(6):339-347. https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2018.18.6.339

3 November 2020 in Applied Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Chuchai AnunmanaChuchai Anunmana
Chuchai Anunmana
CUChananchida Ueawitthayasuporn
Chananchida Ueawitthayasuporn
SKSirichai Kiattavorncharoen
Sirichai Kiattavorncharoen
PTPrakan Thanasrisuebwong
Prakan Thanasrisuebwong
Various three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies are commercially available on the market, but the influence of different technologies on the accuracy of implant-guided surgery is unclear. Thus, three printing technologies: Stereolithographic (SLA), Digital light processing (DLP), and Polyjet were evaluated in this study. An entire 30 polyurethane models replicated the clinical situation. Ten surgical guides were printed by SLA, DLP, and PolyJet. Then, implant-guided surgery was performed, and their accuracy outcomes were measured concerning angular deviation, 3D deviation at the entry point, and apex. On top of that, the total processing time was also compared. For the angular deviation, the mean deviation was not statistically significant among all technologies. For the 3D deviation, PolyJet was statistically more accurate than DLP (p = 0.002) and SLA (p = 0.017) at the entry point. PolyJet was also statistically more accurate than DLP (p = 0.007) in regards to 3D deviation at the apex. Within the limitation of this study, the deviations from the experiment showed that PolyJet had the best outcome regarding the 3D deviations at the entry point and at the apex, meanwhile, the DLP printer had the shortest processing time.