Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Case report
Full Version
Biodentine and Amniotic Membrane to Treat the Hidden Villain- A Rare Case of Labiocervical Vertical Groove
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Tamil Selvan Kumar,
19, Rama Moorthy Nagar, 3rd Street PN Road, Tirupur, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail : tamilbdstirupur@gmail.com
This case report signifies the importance of complications and early diagnosis of radicular groove and to discuss the treatment of combined endo-perio lesion using bone graft mixed with Platelet Rich Fibrin (PRF), amniotic membrane and biodentine. Labiocervical Vertical Groove (LCVG) presents various complications to the patients, especially if it extends to the pulpal space. Labiocervical vertical groove originating near the cervical area of tooth can extend to the radicular surface. These grooves can be mild, moderate or deep based on its extent and depth. This case report deals with the complications, degree of destruction and treatment of an intrabony defect associated with LCVG in maxillary central incisor in a 35-year-old male patient, who reported to the Department of Periodontics and Implantology with the chief complaint of mobility of teeth over a period of past 2 months. In this case report, authors have highlighted the advantages of saucerization, PRF, Amniotic membrane and biodentine to treat the bone loss along with restoration of the groove.
Endo-perio Lesion, Intrabony defect, Platelet rich fibrin, Saucerization
A 35-year-old male patient reported to the Department of Periodontics and Implantology, with a chief complaint of mobile tooth in the upper front teeth region for past 2 months. Patient was informed about the procedure of examination and consent was obtained for examining the patient. Consent for the treatment was obtained after the treatment planning was made. On history of presenting illness, patient reported that the tooth mobility was mild and associated with pain which was of mild in nature, intermittent, non radiating, aggrevated during mastication and relieved at rest. Patient did not have any significant past medical or dental history.
On intraoral clinical examination in relation to 11, 12, 21 and 22 under dental chair light, gingiva was reddish, soft and edematous in relation to 11 (right maxillary central incisor). The position of the marginal gingival was below the cementoenamel junction in 11. Stippling was absent in 11 region on examination under visible light. Mild groove was seen labially on the right maxillary central incisor. On examination with Williams Periodontal probe, there was a pocket depth of more than 10 mm on the buccal aspect of 11 as shown in (Table/Fig 1). Tooth mobility determined with the help of back end of mouth mirror and Williams Periodontal probe handle and there was grade I mobility in relation to 11 according to Miller’s classification of mobility (1). Fremitus test was done by placing wet ungloved finger partially over the teeth and partially over the gingival in maxillary anterior teeth region (2). Patient was asked to clench his teeth and the test was positive. There was mild vibration felt by the operator.
On intraoral periapical radiographic examination, vertical bone loss was significant around the tooth 11 (Table/Fig 2), extending from cervical region of the tooth to near the apical portion of the tooth. Pulp vitality testing was done using electric pulp tester and the tooth was detected non vital. The condition was provisionally diagnosed as primary periodontitis with secondary endodontic lesion. Under local anesthesia, access opening was done and root canal was debrided and irrigated with hydrogen peroxide. Calcium hydroxide was placed as an intracanal medicament. Obturation was done after one week by lateral condensation method and postoperative intraoral periapical radiograph was taken as shown in the (Table/Fig 2). Treatment plan included root canal treatment in 11, splinting of teeth in relation to 13, 12, 11, 21, 22 and 23. Kirkland flap was advised for accessibility and restoration of the groove and bony defect. Teeth were splinted with twisted ligature wire prior to the reflection of flap using periosteal elevator to facilitate the surgical procedure.
Following root canal treatment, patient was asked to report after 1 week for review and flap surgery. Local anesthesia (lignocaine hydrochloride) was injected through infiltration technique. Sulcular incision was given in relation to 12, 11, 21 and 22 using Bard Parker blade size number 12. Vertical incision was given in the distal aspect of 12 for proper accessibility. Following thorough debridement, the radicular groove was well appreciated and was saucerized with the help of diamond coated ultrasonic tip as shown in (Table/Fig 3). The Labialcervical Vertical Groove (LCVG) was restored with the biodentine material. The bony defect was filled with bone graft (osseograft - xenograft material) mixed with Platelet Rich Fibrin (PRF) (Table/Fig 4). Which was then stabilized with amniotic membrane (TATA Memorial Hospital, Tissue Bank, Mumbai) as shown in (Table/Fig 5). The Flap was repositioned using sling suture followed by the placement of coe-pak (Table/Fig 6). Postoperative instructions were given to the patient. Patient was instructed to do mouth rinse twice a day for one week. Patient was recalled after 10 days for suture removal and the area was irrigated using normal saline. Wound healing was found to be satisfactory. Patient was asked to come at 3rd and 6th month for clinical and radiographical examination. Splinting was removed at 3rd month after surgery. Mobility was reduced and bone fill was seen in the intraoral radiograph during follow-up (Table/Fig 7), (Table/Fig 8).
A successful periodontal treatment should essentially result in esthetic improvement, which depends on maintaining the gingival position and the level of the interdental papilla throughout and after the periodontal surgery (3). Radicular groove is one of the anamolies which may cause clinical relevant problems by creating a discontinuation of the epithelial closure around the tooth surface, thereby creating a niche for bacterial accumulation (4). Labiocervical vertical groove is one of the reason for bone loss and localized periodontitis. Labiocervical vertical groove is rare when compared to palate radicular groove with prevalence rate of 3 to 6.5% (5). Labiocervical vertical groove is due to anamoly in the enamel organ and Hertwigs epithelial root sheath on the labial aspect of the teeth (6). The LCVG is found mostly in the central incisors (7). Aswini S et al., reported a unilateral labiocervical vertical groove on the maxillary left central incisor which was restored with glass ionomer cement and guided tissue regeneration technique was done to regenerate the lost periodontal tissues (8). Various treatment modalities are available for the treatment of such defects which includes subgingival curettage, odontoplasty, saucerization and filling of the grooves with restorative materials (9). In this case report, the defect was successfully managed by combined periodontic and endodontic procedures. Root canal treatment and splinting was done prior to the periodontal surgery.
Full thickness flap was reflected in relation to 11, 12, 21 and 22 for accessibility and visualization of the intrabony defect which was evident from the intraoral periapical radiograph. Vertical relieving incision was placed in the mesial line angle of 12 in such a way that the base of the flap is wide to provide clear vision, good access, wide exposure and rich vascular supply to the reflected flap (10). The defect was saucerized using a diamond coated ultrasonic tip to prevent future accumulation of the bacterial deposits in the groove. The diamond coated sonic tips have been shown to provide a smooth surface after saucerization procedure, thereby aiding in good oral hygiene maintenance (11).
The radicular groove was restored with biodentine- a bioactive cement which have been found to possess superior handling characteristics, excellent biocompatibility and ideal biomaterial for periodontal regeneration. Biodentine have been compared with Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA) and studies have shown its preference over MTA due to its short setting time which can prevent flap shrinkage and poor marginal seal (12). In this present case report, the angular bony defect was filled with autoplastic bone graft. The graft material induces host undifferentiated mesenchymal cells to differentiate into osteoblasts which subsequently aids in the formation of new bone in the defect region (13).
Platelet rich fibrin membrane was placed along with the graft materials which favours the bony regeneration by providing the essential growth factors (14). Amniotic membrane have been used in this case over other guided tissue membranes because of its excellent physiological seal with the host tissues, thereby precluding the bacterial contamination (15). Kumar KA et al., reported a successful resolution of the interradicular lesion and radiographic bone fill upon the placement of amniotic membrane over periodontal defect (16). Studies have suggested the usage of amniotic membranes not only because of its structural and anatomic contable/figureuration, but also due to its healing enhancement properties by providing a rich source of stem cells and reduced postoperative scarring (17),(18). Kumar A et al., have investigated the effect of amniotic membrane on periodontal tissue regeneration and reported better result when the amnion membrane was plaved in combination with bonegraft (test group) compared to bone graft (control group) alone (19).
Combined Endo-perio lesion requires careful diagnosis, treatment and frequent monitoring of the condition to prevent the recurrence of the disease. This case report shows a successful management of vertical bony defect associated with labiocervical vertical groove. The combination of the bonegraft, PRF and amniotic membrane have resulted in a significant reduction in pocket level, increase in Clinical attachment level and bony regeneration at 6 month follow-up suggesting a successful inerdisciplinary management of the case.
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/55638.16442
Date of Submission: Feb 11, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Feb 25, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Mar 21, 2022
Date of Publishing: Jun 01, 2022
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Feb 23, 2022
• Manual Googling: Mar 14, 2022
• iThenticate Software: May 25, 2022 (5%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com