Dentinogenesis imperfecta (DI) and amelogenesis imperfecta (AI) are hereditary abnormalities of dental hard tissues. Dental abnormalities may also be accompanied by symptoms of disorders such as osteogenesis imperfecta. AI and DI have a significant burden on socializing, function, and comfort; therefore, frequent screening and accurate diagnosis is the cornerstone of managing such conditions. Both AI and DI could be treated with many strategies, including restorative, prosthetic, periodontal, surgical, and orthodontics treatment. The interdisciplinary combination of orthodontic, prosthodontic, and periodontic treatment has been proven to improve the prognosis of AI and DI. Regarding orthodontic treatment, the most difficult element of orthodontic therapy may be maintaining a high level of motivation for what might be a prolonged form of treatment spanning several years. There are many forms of orthodontic management for AI and DI, including removable appliances, functional appliances, and fixed appliances. Clear aligner therapy (CAT) contains a broad range of equipment that works in different ways, has different construction processes, and is compatible with different malocclusion procedures. The application of CAT in patients with AI and DI is favorable over the fixed applicants. However, the available evidence regarding the application of CAT in AI is weak and heterogeneous. In this review, we discussed the current evidence regarding the application of clear CAT in patients with AI and DI.

The goal of this cross‐sectional observational study was to assess dental students’ satisfaction regarding team‐based learning (TBL) methodology in prosthodontics courses taught at College of Dentistry, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Saudi Arabia. Undergraduate dental students at second, third, fourth, and fifth years were taught prosthodontics courses through traditional and TBL pedagogies. TBL sessions consisted of preparation, readiness assurance, and application. At the end of each prosthodontics course, the students were asked to complete a self‐administered questionnaire that was divided into four sections to assess the effect of TBL on the following parameters: information acquisition, interpersonal skills improvement, classroom environment, and the students‐instructors interaction. The responses of the questionnaire followed the Likert scoring method (scaled from 1 to 5). The t‐test and ANOVA statistical analyses were performed using SPSS. Results. The response rate to the questionnaire was 86%. There were a significant relationship and correlation between TBL pedagogy and student satisfaction (P values ≤ 0.05) for all levels. The means of the responses for the second and fifth years were 4.36 and 4.56, respectively, where the means for the third and fourth years were 3.54 and 3.59, respectively. The parameter notably affected by TBL was interpersonal skills enhancement. All students strongly agreed that TBL enhances personal flexibility and boosts their self‐esteem. Conclusion. Students showed positive perceptions about TBL pedagogy in terms of active engagement, knowledge acquisition, and improvement of interpersonal skills leading to more efficient learning outcome.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the risk factors contributing to gingival recession among patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. Methods: Records of 100 Caucasian patients who completed orthodontic treatment were evaluated before and after treatment. Intercanine and molar widths, arch perimeter, arch depth, and keratinized gingival height were measured for both arches. The association of orthodontic treatment strategy (changing incisal inclination, expansion, and extraction), keratinized gingival height, and various other measurements with gingival recession was evaluated by using generalized linear mixed models with logistic regression analysis. Results: For each 1 mm increase in pre- and post-treatment keratinized gingival height, there was 0.77 and 0.51 times lower odds of gingival recession. For each 1 mm increase in post-treatment intercanine width, there was 0.80 times lower odds of gingival recession. And for each 1 mm increase in change in the arch depth, there was 1.16 times higher odds of gingival recession. For each 1 mm increase in pre- and post-treatment mandibular symphysis width, there was 0.47 and 0.39 times lower odds of gingival recession. Conclusion: Regardless of the type of orthodontic treatment, increased keratinized gingival height, mandibular symphysis width, and post-treatment intercanine width lower the risk of gingival recession.

Objectives. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of super floss and water flosser in plaque removal for patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. Methods. A single‐blind, randomized, controlled, parallel clinical trial with a split‐mouth protocol was conducted on young adult orthodontic patients who were recruited from Riyadh Specialized Dental Center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The type of floss used was randomly assigned to each side of the oral cavity; Super‐Floss® (Oral‐B) was used on one side, while the Waterpik® water flosser was used on the other. Patients’ plaque level was assessed using Rustogi et al. modified navy plaque index (RMNPI) at baseline and immediately after cleaning. Results. A total of 62 subjects were screened; however, only 34 subjects were enrolled in the study with an equal number of males and females. Overall, the plaque score was significantly reduced from 0.56 ± 0.35 to 0.13 ± 0.26 in the super floss group and from 0.61 ± 0.35 to 0.13 ± 0.28 in the water flosser group. There was no significant difference between the mean difference of super floss and water flosser (p = 0.951). On the other hand, there was no significant difference between both groups in terms of the preintervention plaque score (p = 0.379). The water flosser had a greater effect size on plaque removal compared to super floss on distal interproximal surface of the molar tooth with a mean difference of (−0.21, 95% CI: 00.37 to −0.04, p = 0.033). Conclusions. The use of super floss or water flosser as interproximal aids for plaque removal in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment are both effective. Trial registration. ISRCTN, ISRCTN83875016. Registered 12 September 2021‐retrospectively registered, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN83875016.

Saliva is a critical and useful biological fluid necessary for good health and for the appropriate execution of mouth activities. Orthodontic biomaterials have a complex relationship with many components, including the oral environment. Treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances may causes dental caries. As a result, it is necessary to comprehend how orthodontic therapy and various fluoride regimens affect the chances of developing dental cavities as well as individual risk factors. Usage of fluoride will tend to reduce the caries in the patients diagnosed with the fixed orthodontic treatment. The aim of this study was to screen the biochemical parameter of the fluoride levels in the patients undergone and completed the treatment of orthodontic fixed appliances. In this study, 35 patients have been visited on day 1 as well as day 35 and categorized as T₀ and T₁ groups. Saliva samples were collected and fluoride levels were measured between T₀ and T₁ groups. Using the fluoride kit with the spectrophotometer, fluoride levels were measured. The results confirmed similar fluoride levels between T₀ (26.11 ± 4.86) and T₁ (27.71 ± 4.40) groups. There was no significant association observed in this study (p = 0.56). Fluoride might have no role in the patients undergoing orthodontic treatment.