Daily Cosmetic Research Analysis

BACKGROUND: Mandibular fractures are technically demanding because accurate restoration of occlusion is required and conventional maxillomandibular fixation (MMF) techniques have important limitations. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to measure and compare the clinical efficacy of CAD-CAM splints versus conventional arch bars as MMF techniques in subjects undergoing open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of mandibular fractures in the dentate region. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This single-blind randomized clinical study was conducted in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at a tertiary academic center between September 2022 and March 2024. Adult patients indicated for ORIF of mandibular fractures in the dentate region were eligible. Exclusion criteria were isolated condylar fractures, comminuted or edentulous mandibular fractures, and associated midface fractures affecting occlusion. PREDICTOR VARIABLE: The primary predictor variable was the MMF technique and subjects were randomly assigned to CAD-CAM splint or conventional arch bar groups. OUTCOME VARIABLES: The primary outcome was clinical efficacy, assessed by postoperative occlusion, need for and duration of postoperative MMF, and operative time. Secondary outcomes included lower border step deformity, lingual cortical reduction, preparation time, and achievement of condylar pushback. COVARIATES: The covariates were demographics, fracture patterns, and presence of associated condylar fractures and their management. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Appropriate tests were used for analysis with significance set at P < .05. RESULTS: The sample was composed of 32 subjects (16 in each group) with a mean age of 29.9 years (standard deviation [SD] 10.7); 28 (87.5%) were males. Normal occlusion at 4 weeks was achieved in 16 of 16 (100%) CAD-CAM subjects and 12 of 16 (75%) arch bar subjects (P = .02). The combined mean operative time was 50.4 minutes (SD 15.8) for CAD-CAM and 59.9 minutes (SD 18.1) for arch bars (P = .1). The combined mean preparation time was 90.9 minutes (SD 9.4) for CAD-CAM splints and 83.9 minutes (SD 10.5) for arch bars (P = .1). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: CAD-CAM splints as an MMF technique are associated with improved occlusal outcomes, a lower need for postoperative MMF in complex fracture patterns, and shorter operative times in selected subgroups compared with conventional arch bars.

BACKGROUND: Post-endodontic pain PP is a frequent complication following root canal treatment RCT, primarily resulting from acute inflammation. Pre-emptive corticosteroid administration has been proposed to attenuate this inflammatory response and reduce PP. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the effectiveness of injection-based corticosteroids delivered through different routes in minimizing PP at various postoperative intervals. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar was conducted up to March 2025, following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Randomized controlled trials evaluating pre-emptive corticosteroid injections via infiltrative, intraligamentary, or intramuscular routes were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool, and meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.4. The review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO CRD420251005886. RESULTS: Nine RCTs comprising 917 participants were analyzed. Corticosteroid injections, including dexamethasone, methylprednisolone, and betamethasone, significantly reduced PP compared with placebo at all time points, with the most pronounced effect within the first 12 hours and sustained, though reduced, benefits up to 72 hours. Infiltrative injections demonstrated greater efficacy than intraligamentary routes. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-emptive corticosteroid injections, particularly dexamethasone via infiltrative or intraligamentary routes, effectively reduce post-endodontic pain, especially within the first 24 hours.

The BREAST-Q was developed to address a gap in breast surgery outcomes research as a validated, procedure-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that assesses satisfaction and health related quality of life. Despite global adoption, reporting practices remain inconsistent. This review evaluated how BREAST-Q domains are reported and compated outcomes between postmastectomy reconstruction and cosmetic breast surgery populations. Five databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched from January 1, 2009 to September 16, 2022. Of 6921 records, 307 studies met inclusion criteria. Eligible studies reported mean BREAST-Q scores (0-100 scale) in patients undergoing postmastectomy reconstruction, breast augmentation, or breast reduction. Studies were grouped as reconstruction (Group 1) or cosmetic (Group 2). Extracted data included publication year, country, sample size, BREAST-Q means ± standard deviation and domain coverage. Analyses were descriptive due to heterogeneity in design, populations, and follow-up The most frequently reported domains in both groups were psychosocial well-being, satisfaction with breasts, and sexual well-being (Group 1: 79.12%, 91.21%, and 77.29%; Group 2: 74.55%, 96.36%, and 83.64%). The aggregate global weighted mean BREAST-Q score was higher in Group 2 than in Group 1 (81.99 vs 74.49), Though these values represent descriptive estimates, not direct comparisons. Although widely used, BREAST-Q reporting is inconsistent, with disproportionate emphasis on select domains. This selective reporting introduces bias and limits comparability. Comprehensive reporting across all domains, or inclusion of an overall summary score, would better reflect patient satisfaction and align with the instrument's intended purpose. Level of Evidence: 3 (Therapeutic).