A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Interdisciplinary treatment of a patient with amelogenesis imperfecta: Case report with a 35-year follow-up. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The case presents an adolescent female with amelogenesis imperfecta (AI) and highlights the benefits of an interdisciplinary management approach compared to her previous multidisciplinary treatment.
  • The patient had a history of AI affecting her teeth, and her initial treatment did not adequately prepare her for restoration, prompting a referral for a second opinion.
  • After forming an interdisciplinary team including specialists from various dental fields, her case was successfully resolved, resulting in a stable, healthy, and aesthetically pleasing outcome over 35 years.

Article Abstract

Objective: This case will illustrate the interdisciplinary management of an adolescent female patient with amelogenesis imperfecta (AI). It will contrast this approach and compare it to the previous "multidisciplinary" treatment rendered before the patient was referred for a second opinion.

Clinical Considerations: The patient had a family history of AI affecting all of her permanent teeth. There were many impacted teeth. The majority of her family and relatives afflicted by this opted for dentures. The patient had undergone 2 years of treatment and was told that her "braces would be removed next week." Her new dentist was concerned because the case was not ready to restore.

Conclusion: He recommended referral to another orthodontist for a second opinion and formulation of an interdisciplinary treatment plan that would include a periodontist, endodontist, and restorative dentist. The patient's family accepted the second opinion referral and restarted treatment with an interdisciplinary team. The restorative dentist was the quarterback for this integrated and sequenced approach. The case was ultimately restored. A 35 year follow-up shows stability with a caries free, periodontally healthy, esthetic result.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12804DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

interdisciplinary treatment
8
patient amelogenesis
8
amelogenesis imperfecta
8
second opinion
8
restorative dentist
8
patient
5
interdisciplinary
4
treatment patient
4
case
4
imperfecta case
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!