Many in-office bleaching techniques use the light/laser in conjunction with the bleaching agent claiming more favorable bleaching results. Controversy still exists in the literature as to the role of a light/laser in bleaching results. The goal of this study is to determine, through Comparative Effectiveness-Efficacy Research and Analysis for Practice (CEERAP), if the co-use of light/laser activation with the chemical bleaching agent has improved teeth whitening compared to using the chemical bleaching agent alone. Systematic reviews and randomized clinical trials on the research question were obtained using multiple search engines. Assessment of the level and quality of evidence and acceptable sample analysis were performed for the Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs). Due to heterogeneity of the acceptable studies, meta-analysis was performed only on the two most homogenous studies. Qualitative assessment of the acceptable studies was performed. The strength of clinical recommendation was assessed. Only one qualitative systematic review was found. Eight articles were accepted as high quality RCTs. The meta-analysis shows preferable outcome when using the light activation with the bleaching material than when using the bleaching material alone. Qualitative assessment of the acceptable studies shows conflicting results. Most studies agreed that the use of light is proven to increase the whitening effect of the bleaching agent, especially for a short term after treatment. Additional studies with greater consistency in methodology and outcomes are needed to be able to reach a definite consensus regarding the effectiveness of using light during bleaching through an overarching meta-analysis for more powerful statistical results.

Introduction: It is a known fact that there is a connection between periodontal disease and certain systemic conditions. Even though there are some contradictory results in the conducted studies, periodontal disease has been accepted as a risk factor affecting the negative terminations of pregnancy in recent years (premature birth [PB], low birth weight). This consideration is associated with a positive correlation between two conditions in some studies. The Hypothesis: Although there is such a relationship between periodontal disease and PB, the linking mechanism has not been explained as presence of the relation cannot reveal the cause-effect relationship. It should be discussed whether or not this positive connection is caused by the fact that periodontal disease is an independent risk factor for PB, or the change (hormonal, inflammatory) in the systemic condition in PB cases causes a risk for periodontal disease. Evaluation of the Hypothesis: The fact that in PB cases the changes in steroid hormone levels might increase the incidence and severity of periodontal disease as in pregnancy, or there could be a common risk factor that may cause both cases, has not been revealed yet and should be taken into consideration.

Introduction: Developing new methods to enhance orthodontic tooth movement and shorten the duration of treatment has always been desired. However, to date, no therapies have been widely used in clinics. Recent studies and feedback information from patients have shown that drinking coffee may accelerate orthodontic tooth movement. The Hypothesis: Drinking coffee, as a daily habit of many people, can be an effective accelerator of tooth movement with little side effect for caffeine can break the calcium balance in bone tissue and directly inhibit the development of osteoblasts, leading to temporary decreased bone mineral density and consequently inducing faster orthodontic tooth movement. Evaluation of the Hypothesis: Much effort has been made to explore therapies to shorten orthodontic treatment period with limited success. Daily coffee consumption may be a promising approach to enhance orthodontic tooth movement for its reversible effect on bone mineral density and calcium balance.

Introduction: The American Heart Association (AHA) recommendations for antimicrobial prophylaxis for infective endocarditis (IE) are controversial. According to the new guidelines released by the AHA now, the only patients to receive antibiotics will be those at highest risk, i.e. those with a prosthetic heart valve, a history of endocarditis, certain forms of congenital heart disease or valvulopathy after heart transplantation, and only before certain dental procedures. Unfortunately, these guidelines are still based largely on expert opinion, with very little hard evidence to show that antibiotic therapy actually prevents IE. The Hypothesis: The reported incidence of bacteremia during dental intervention ranges from 10% to 100% and, with daily brushing and flossing, from 20% to 68%. Because bacteremia also occurs during brushing and flossing of teeth, why give prophylaxis just for dental procedures? Moreover, the risks of causing adverse or anaphylactic reactions from antibiotics as well as contributing to the nationwide antibiotic resistance problem are issues not to be taken lightly. Evaluation of the Hypothesis: The hypothesis discusses the AHA recommendations for antimicrobial prophylaxis for IE, indicating some inherent limitations associated with it, and stresses upon the fact that these recommendation should also be updated, if not completely changed, to cope up with the advancements in the proper treatment plan.

Introduction: Knowledge of root canal morphology is essential for successful endodontic therapy. Failure to recognize unusual root canal anatomy may lead to unsuccessful endodontic treatment. Case Report: This case report describes the successful endodontic treatment of the maxillary central incisor with unusual anatomy of two roots and two root canals. A 23-year-old male patient was referred for dental consultation with discoloration of the maxillary right central incisor with periapical lesion, which revealed unusual anatomy of root on radiographic examination, and was confirmed upon exploration. Discussion: As described by Vertucci, the maxillary central incisor presents a single root and single root canal in 100% of the cases. However, few cases of maxillary central incisors with two canals were reported in the literature, most of which were associated with developmental anomalies like fusion, germination or dens invaginatus. Clinician should be aware of the unusual anatomical variations that should be detected by the different diagnostic resources available.

Introduction: Supernumerary teeth are present in addition to the normal complement of teeth in permanent or deciduous dentitions. Incidence is high in permanent dentition, affects both the gender. They are more common in males, with the male to female ratio of 2:1. When the supernumerary teeth are causing problems such as, extensive resorption of adjacent teeth, hindering the eruption or malposition of permanent teeth, early surgical intervention is recommended. Case Report: A case of bilaterally impacted supernumerary premolars was reported when an orthopentomograph view was taken which revealed the presence of additional teeth impacted in relation to 35-36 and 45-46. Surgical removal was done as they were resorbing the roots of teeth in their vicinity. Discussion: Literature reports increased occurrence of the supernumeraries in the maxilla but supernumerary premolars are more likely to develop in the mandible. Etiology of supernumerary teeth is ambiguous and is due to following conditions:atavism or reversion, heredity, aberrations during embryologic formation, progress zone, and unified etiologic explanation.