Background: Bioceramic materials have emerged as a significant advancement in endodontics, offering excellent biocompatibility, sealing ability, and bioactivity. Their use has expanded in recent years, particularly for pulp capping, perforation repair, and regenerative procedures. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the knowledge of bioceramics among private practice dentists, evaluate the frequency of use of sealing and filling bioceramics, and examine the applied clinical protocols as well as potential shortcomings. Materials and methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted according to Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines, based on an epidemiological Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) survey. It was carried out among Tunisian private practice dentists. Data were processed and analyzed using Excel 2007 and Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Statistics 21.0. The sample size was calculated using the standard formula for estimating a proportion in a cross-sectional study, and participants were randomly selected. Participation was voluntary, anonymous, and confidential. Results: A total of 200 dentists participated. Only 54.5% reported using sealing bioceramics, with 35.05% using them in all cases, 19.94% for periapical lesions, and 16.92% for root perforations. Approximately half of the dentists (53.01%) observed faster healing when using these sealers. Regarding filling bioceramics, 67.5% of participants used them, with a preference for MTA. These materials were indicated for various clinical situations, including repair of floor perforations, pulp capping, apexification of immature permanent teeth, and repair of root perforations. However, 45.61% of participants reported treatment failures when using these bioceramics, with failure to adhere to one of the endodontic treatment steps identified as the primary cause. Conclusion: This study concluded that younger dentists tend to use bioceramics more frequently, filling bioceramics are better known than sealing ones, and most participants are familiar with the clinical indications of these materials. It is essential to provide further guidance and recommendations on the clinical application of bioceramics to optimize treatment outcomes.

Background The “all-on-four” concept represents a significant advancement in dental implantology. particularly beneficial in cases of extensive jaw bone loss where invasive bone regeneration procedures are typically required. However, the successful implementation of this technique necessitates meticulous planning concerning implant selection, materials, and prosthesis design. The recent introduction of PEEK (Polyetheretherketone) in dentistry, especially in all-on-four prosthetics, prompts questions regarding its clinical efficacy and comparative biomechanical and biological advantages over conventional materials such as titanium and zirconia. While some studies have compared PEEK with other materials, systematic reviews evaluating its efficacy are scarce. This systematic review protocol intends to assess the evidence regarding the viability of PEEK as a potential alternative within the all-on-four approach in dental implantology. Methods This systematic review protocol will adhere to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Interventions and align with the Methodological Expectations of the Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) guidelines. Utilizing a comprehensive search strategy, multiple databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, EBSCO, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and registries of clinical trials, will be explored. The search aims to identify randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies investigating the application of PEEK in the all-on-four approach for dental procedures. Emphasizing clinically relevant outcomes such as implant survival, prosthesis success, peri-implant complications, and patient satisfaction, this review aims to provide insights into the effectiveness and potential benefits of using PEEK in all-on-four prosthetics. Non-randomized studies will be assessed for bias using ROBINS-I, while randomized controlled trials will undergo evaluation with the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool, ROB II. Discussion The outcomes derived from this systematic review hold great significance for dental practitioners exploring the all-on-four concept. Understanding PEEK’s advantages and limitations compared to titanium and zirconia facilitates tailored treatment plans, enhancing success and satisfaction, ultimately improving dental care quality. Systematic review registration PROSPERO: CRD42024531175 (Registered on 13/04/2024).

The aim of this study was to assess biomedical waste management practices in dental clinics and explore the sustainability of strategies employed to minimize environmental impact while ensuring public health safety. A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted among dental professionals in Tunisia from March 3, 2023, to March 10, 2024. A total of 50 clinics participated in the study. Data were collected using a survey questionnaire consisting of 30 questions, which were divided into three sections: Knowledge (10 questions), attitudes (10 questions), and practices (10 questions). The survey was conducted in person and was complemented by an observation checklist during waste audits in selected dental clinics. The data were recorded and statistically analyzed using the statistical software SPSS, version 20.0. The study involved 120 dental professionals across 50 clinics. The results revealed that 68% of the participants demonstrated basic awareness of waste segregation, but only 42% followed consistent waste management protocols. The study identified challenges in sustainable practices, including limited training (only 30% of the participants had received formal waste management training) and insufficient infrastructure (44% of clinics lacked proper segregation bins). Environmental concerns were raised regarding incineration practices, with 50% of clinics continuing to use this method despite its environmental impact. This study provides an overview of biomedical waste management practices in dental clinics, revealing variations in awareness, implementation, and available resources. These findings are crucial for policymakers and educators working to promote sustainable biomedical waste management in dental settings. By addressing knowledge gaps and implementing eco-friendly practices, the dental sector can reduce its environmental footprint while maintaining high public health standards. How to cite this article: Boukhris H, Zidani H, Khalifa ABH, et al. Environmental Impact of Dental Waste: A Survey-based Analysis of Waste Segregation and Recycling Practices in Dental Clinics. J Contemp Dent Pract 2025;26(3):250-256.

Background Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is widely used in the biomedical field due to its outstanding biological and mechanical properties. Originally employed as a temporary abutment in implantology, recent research has expanded its indications for more definitive applications, such as frameworks and dental post and core. However, PEEK’s inert nature and low surface energy pose challenges for adhesion, necessitating surface modifications. Various physical and chemical modification techniques, including acid etching (e.g., 98% sulfuric acid), sandblasting with alumina oxide (Al₂O₃), plasma treatment, laser irradiation, silanization, and air abrasion with silica-coated particles, have been proposed to enhance PEEK’s bonding performance. Despite numerous clinical investigations, standardized protocols for surface treatment remain lacking. This systematic review aims to assess the impact of surface treatments on the bonding performance of PEEK posts. Methods A detailed search of the literature will be conducted across several databases including PubMed, Scopus and clinical trial registries. Additional databases such as Cochrane Central, EMBASE, Web of Science and EBSCO will also be included. The search strategy will target controlled randomized studies and non-randomized clinical trials evaluating the impact of surface treatments on PEEK post adhesion strength. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) will be used to assess bias in non-randomized studies, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB II) tool will be employed for evaluating randomized controlled trials. Data extraction will focus on study design, treatment methods, outcomes and results. This systematic review protocol will adhere to the guidelines for systematic reviews outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Discussion The discussion will explore the implications of findings on clinical practice, highlighting the importance of enhancing PEEK’s bioactivity and surface energy to improve bonding efficacy in dental procedures. Moreover, it will suggest areas for future research to advance dental materials science, aiming to optimize the utilization of PEEK in dental applications Systematic review registration PROSPERO: CRD42024529783 (Registered on 08/04/2024).

The tongue, as a multifunctional organ, exhibits a variety of physiological characteristics and pathological alterations. Identifying and understanding these variations is crucial for ensuring an accurate diagnosis and appropriate management. This article explores the main common physiological variations, such as geographic tongue, fissured tongue, etc., as well as pathological conditions, including elementary lesions such as vesicles, bullae, erosions, ulcers, plaques, along with surface changes (atrophy), color changes (coatings, pigmentation), or even shape alterations (infiltrations). It discusses current diagnostic tools and therapeutic approaches while emphasizing the importance of regular monitoring to prevent complications and maintain optimal oral health.

Long-term data evaluating both patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in anterior maxillary implant rehabilitation are still limited, making this investigation highly relevant. This study aimed to evaluate patient satisfaction and OHRQoL 5 years after anterior maxillary implant placement. It specifically assessed long-term satisfaction with implant-supported restorations in the aesthetic zone, the impact on OHRQoL, and key clinical and prosthetic factors influencing perceived treatment success. A prospective study was conducted at the University Hospital of Farhat Hached, Sousse, Tunisia, from March to June 2024. Eligible patients who underwent anterior maxillary implant placement between 2018 and 2019 were included. Patients with fixed implant-supported restorations and good systemic health were eligible, while those with parafunctional habits or incomplete follow-up data were excluded. Satisfaction was assessed using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and OHRQoL was measured using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP)-14 and Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire (PIDAQ) questionnaires. A total of 50 patients participated. The sample size was determined based on an expected satisfaction rate of 80%, with a 95% confidence interval and a 10% margin of error, resulting in a required minimum of 47 participants. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 20. Descriptive statistics summarized demographics, satisfaction scores, and OHRQoL outcomes. Inferential analyses included paired t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to compare baseline and 5-year follow-up data. Spearman's correlation was used to examine relationships between implant-related factors and satisfaction or OHRQoL scores, while multivariate regression identified predictors of long-term satisfaction. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Fifty patients (mean age: 36.5 ± 5.3 years) participated, with a 98.04% implant survival rate. At 5 years, 86.2% reported high satisfaction, with a mean VAS score of 92.8%. Phonetic outcomes received a 100% satisfaction rate, while chewing comfort and stability were also highly rated (94.0 and 93.7%, respectively). Esthetic satisfaction was reported by 85.0% of patients, and 67.5% had no difficulty maintaining hygiene. The OHIP-14 median score of 9.0 indicated minimal OHRQoL impairment. PIDAQ results showed that while most patients were satisfied with esthetics, some experienced psychosocial impacts. Five years after anterior maxillary implant placement, patients reported high satisfaction, especially regarding phonetics, chewing comfort, and esthetics. The minimal OHRQoL impact and low PIDAQ scores highlight the positive psychosocial effects of implant restorations. These results suggest that long-term evaluation of functional and psychological outcomes should be integrated into clinical decision-making and future prospective studies.