Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

Background: Oral sulfate tablets (OSTs) are bowel preparation agents that combine oral sulfate solution and simethicone. This study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of OST compared to 2 L-polyethylene glycol plus ascorbic acid (2 L-PEG/ASC). Methods: This prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blinded, multicenter, noninferiority trial enrolled 211 healthy adults who underwent colonoscopy between May 2020 and September 2022 at 13 university hospitals. The bowel cleansing rate was assessed using the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) and Harefield Cleansing Scale (HCS), and the preparation agents were administered in split regimens. Results: The total BBPS score (8.2 ± 1.5 vs. 7.8 ± 1.4, p = 0.040) and the high-quality bowel cleansing rates in the right colon (73.2% vs. 50.5), transverse colon (80.6% vs. 68.0%), and left colon (81.5% vs. 67.0%) on the BBPS were significantly higher in the OST group than in the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. However, the rates of successful cleansing according to BBPS (90.7% vs. 91.2%) and HCS (96.3% vs. 94.2%) did not significantly differ between the two groups.The taste, ease, and amount of consumption of the preparation agent; and willingness to repeat colonoscopy with the same agent (89.8% vs. 78.6%, P = 0.026) were significantly better in the OST group compared to the 2 L-PEG/ASC group. Adverse events and clinically significant laboratory changes were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OST was not inferior to 2 L-PEG/ASC in terms of bowel cleansing efficacy and showed better tolerability when used for bowel preparation for colonoscopy.

In patients with severe alveolar bone resorption on mandibular anterior edentulous areas, it can be difficult to place implants in the location for crowns, and to create the fixed prosthesis having an adequate emergence profile or embrasure, which makes maintenance difficult. Fabricating a removable zirconia prosthesis with a milled bar on poorly positioned implants can be a good option because of easy maintenance. In this case, the patient had severe bone resorption on mandibular anterior region, and large vertical space. We report on the aesthetical and easy-to-maintain results by placing two implants and fabricating a zirconia prosthesis using milled bar.

PURPOSE: . This study aims to clinically compare the fitness and trueness of zirconia crowns fabricated by different combinations of open CAD-CAM systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: . Total of 40 patients were enrolled in this study, and 9 different zirconia crowns were prepared per patient. Each crown was made through the cross-application of 3 different design software (EZIS VR, 3Shape Dental System, Exocad) with 3 different processing devices (Aegis HM, Trione Z, Motion 2). The marginal gap, absolute marginal discrepancy, internal gap(axial, line angle, occlusal) by a silicone replica technique were measured to compare the fit of the crown. The scanned inner and outer surfaces of the crowns were compared to CAD data using 3D metrology software to evaluate trueness. RESULTS: . There were significant differences in the marginal gap, absolute marginal discrepancy, axial and line angle internal gap among the groups (P < .05) in the comparison of fit. There was no statistically significant difference among the groups in terms of occlusal internal gap. The trueness ranged from 36.19 to 43.78 μm but there was no statistically significant difference within the groups (P > .05). CONCLUSION . All 9 groups showed clinically acceptable level of marginal gaps ranging from 74.26 to 112.20 μm in terms of fit comparison. In the comparison of trueness, no significant difference within each group was spotted. Within the limitation of this study, open CAD-CAM systems used in this study can be assembled properly to fabricate zirconia crown. [J Adv Prosthodont 2023;15:155-70]

PURPOSE: . This in vitro study aimed to compare the accuracy of the conventional facebow system and the newly developed POP (PNUD (Pusan National University Dental School) Occlusal Plane) bow system for occlusal plane transfer in asymmetric ear position. MATERIALS AND METHODS: . Two dentists participated in this study, one was categorized as Experimenter 1 and the other as Experimenter 2 based on their clinical experience with the facebow (1F, 2F) and POP bow (1P, 2P) systems. The vertical height difference between the two ears of the phantom model was set to 3 mm. Experimenter 1 and Experimenter 2performed the facebow and POP bow systems on the phantom model 10 times each, and the transfer accuracy was analyzed. The accuracy was evaluated by measuring the angle between the reference virtual plane (RVP) of the phantom model and the experimental virtual plane (EVP) of the upper mounting plate through digital superimposition. All data were statistically analyzed using a paired t-test (P < .05). RESULTS: . Regardless of clinical experience, the POP bow system (0.53° ± 0.30 (1P) and 0.19° ± 0.18 (2P) for Experimenter 1 and 2, respectively) was significantly more accurate than the facebow system (1.88° ± 0.50 (1F) and 1.34° ± 0.25 (2F), respectively) in the frontal view (P < .05). In the sagittal view, no significant differences were found between the POP bow system (0.92° ± 0.50 (1P) and 0.73° ± 0.42 (2P) for Experimenter 1 and 2, respectively) and the facebow system (0.82° ± 0.49 (1F) and 0.60° ± 0.39 (2F), respectively), regardless of clinical experience (P > .05). CONCLUSION . In cases of asymmetric ear position, the POP bow system may transfer occlusal plane information more accurately than the facebow system in the frontal view, regardless of clinical experience.

Background/Aims: Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are diagnosed with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) often. However, the disease course of patients with both IBD and AS is not well understood. This study aims to evaluate the effect of concomitant AS on IBD outcomes. Methods: Among the 4,722 patients with IBD who were treated in 3 academic hospitals from 2004 to 2021, 55 were also diagnosed with AS (IBD-AS group). Based on patients’ electronic medical records, the outcomes of IBD in IBD-AS group and IBD group without AS (IBD-only group) were appraised. Results: The proportion of patients treated with biologics or small molecule therapies was significantly higher in IBD-AS group than the proportion in IBD-only group (27.3% vs. 12.7%, P= 0.036). Patients with both ulcerative colitis and AS had a significantly higher risk of biologics or small molecule therapies than patients with only ulcerative colitis (P< 0.001). For univariable logistic regression, biologics or small molecule therapies were associated with concomitant AS (odds ratio, 4.099; 95% confidence interval, 1.863–9.021; P< 0.001) and Crohn’s disease (odds ratio, 3.552; 95% confidence interval, 1.590–7.934; P= 0.002). Conclusions Concomitant AS is associated with the high possibility of biologics or small molecule therapies for IBD. IBD patients who also had AS may need more careful examination and active treatment to alleviate the severity of IBD.

Interim immediate denture is fabricated to minimize the period of edentulousness after removal of the patient’s remaining teeth and before delivery of final prosthesis. In the case of using the CAD/CAM system, there is an advantage in that the manufacturing process in the clinic and laboratory can be simplified by overcoming some of the limitations of manufacturing interim immediate dentures in the traditional way. However, there are also disadvantages in that errors occur in the process of transmitting information about the patient’s intermaxillary relationship to the digital network of the laboratory, resulting in unstable occlusal relationships or non-esthetic prostheses. To overcome this problem, using the simple and accurate POP BOW system’s occlusal plane digital transfer method, it was possible to fabricate an esthetic and functional 3D printed interim immediate denture after removal of the remaining upper and lower anterior teeth.

The use of implants could improve the support, retention, and stability of removable prosthetic restoration for fully edentulous patients with severe alveolar bone resorption. When the prosthesis is manufactured without accurate diagnosis and evaluation, this may lead to unfavorable treatment result. The patient in this case had the treatment of implant overdentures at a private dental clinic, but visited the hospital for retreatment due to soft tissue pain and decreasing retention of existing dentures. The vertical dimension was raised compared to the existing dentures, and overdentures were manufactured using milled bars and additional attachments. The clinical results were satisfactory in the aspect of improved oral hygiene maintenance, function and esthetics.