Background: Research articles are essential for describing new ideas, techniques, and procedures and consolidating concepts. It creates an opportunity to expose studies and publicly assimilate published knowledge. Therefore, one of them is the most used and accepted index to verify the author’s scientific impact is the H-index or Hirsch index. It provides a robust single metric that combines quality and quantity. Therefore, it presents disadvantages, (1) researchers with shorter scientific carriers may have fewer articles and citations than those with longer scientific life; (2) it allows scientists to receive citations even if no new papers are published; (3) it is only useful for comparing the better scientists in a field; (4) this indicator can never decrease; (5) it is only weakly sensitive to the number of citations received; (6) the major and minor (or no) contributor in the research gained equal h-index. Then, the H-index ignores the total of citations and the time of a researcher's experience (“scientific age” [sa]). Objective: Thus, the goal of this study was to present a new index system (GFsa index ©) based on the two variables completely forgotten (total of citations and “scientific age”), introducing a new terminology “scientific age”, to evaluate the best-ranked researchers in Dentistry. Methods: The AD Scientific Index was used, and all researchers included in this study were cited in the AD Scientific Index (2024) in the Dentistry field and had the Google Scholar page accessible for a consultation to manually obtain the total of citations and calculate the “scientific age”. The information was retrieved by two authors (G.V.O.F. and J.C.H.F.), who assessed the data twice to avoid errors or mistakes. For inclusion: a minimum H-index value of 30; for exclusion: (i) the author did not have a Google Scholar page; (ii) duplicated author; or (iii) presented any suspicious activities about manipulation of articles. Then, a dataset of all researchers who were reported in Dentistry was prepared (name, H-index, i10 index, and publications). The formula developed and applied was GFsa=(total number of citations)/(“scientific age)². The Pearson correlation statistically evaluated the data obtained; the confidence interval was 95%. Results: A total of 9,093 researchers in Dentistry were recorded, of whom 1,020 were included. Then, we collected all 1,020 researchers' Google Scholar data (publications, citations, and indexes), and each researcher's total citations and “scientific age” were registered and calculated. The mean “scientific age” registered was 34.18 ± 13.34 (standard error of mean = 0.4181). With this information and data collected, GFsa index © was calculated, presenting a minimum value of 0.2186 and a maximum of 154.8 (mean = 10.33 ± 11.82; standard error of mean = 0.3706). Then, the data was organized and sorted following the ranking obtained in the GFsa index ©. The Pearson correlation showed that the H-index had a weakly positive association with the researcher’s “scientific age”; this fact means that the H-index will increase according to the “scientific age” increase. Otherwise, a moderately negative correlation between GFsa and “scientific age” was demonstrated, whereby a higher GFsa © had a lower “Scientific age”. This assessment shows that the variables introduced were fairly used. Moreover, a positive correlation was observed between both indexes (H-index and GFsa). Conclusion: It is possible to conclude that the new variable reported (“Scientific age”) and using the total citations brought a fairer and more feasible evaluation among the researchers. Thus, we are launching the new GFsa index © and the new information named “Scientific age” for the first time in the literature. The future perspective of the GFsa © application will be (1) the evaluation of the 9,093 researchers in Dentistry (total initially registered), including more authors/researchers in the Dentistry field, (2) expanding the exposition of this new index for other areas of the knowledge, and (3) provide free access of all data through the website (http://gfindex.us.to).

Purpose: The goal of this article was to introduce a new technique for root coverage (RC), the Mixed-Thickness Tunnel access (MiTT), approaching a full-split design, showing the results obtained in a case series and demonstrating it step-by-step. Methods: Healthy individuals, non-smokers, and non-diabetics, who were diagnosed with gingival recession (GR) type 1 or 2 (RT1 or RT2). After all necessary evaluations, prophylaxis was performed 14 days before the surgical procedure. Then, after the basics clinical conduct and anesthesia, one or two vertical incision(s) on the mucosa (around 1-2 mm apical to the MGJ), lateral to the papilla base, were done. Initial detachment of the mucosa from the muscles (split design); it was permitted (but not mandatory) to do intrasulcular incisions; from the MGJ to coronal, subperiosteal access was done to raise the full-thickness tunnel. It must communicate up to the gingival sulcus area and the papilla’s base, keeping the papilla’s tip intact. A connective tissue graft was harvested, which was inserted through the linear incision or intrasulcularly. Interrupted sutures were done and may be used as adjunctive material. Results: Nine healthy individuals (7 females and 2 males) aged 19 and 43 years were enrolled. They were treated following the MiTT steps. There were four cases with a single GR, 2 patients with 2 teeth involved, and three with 3 or 4 GR. Seven cases were RT1 and two RT2. All RT1 cases achieved 100% RC, while the mean RC obtained for RT2 was around 80%. Conclusion: MiTT can be considered a more straightforward approach for minimally invasive surgical technique, which is a feasible option to treat RC with a high success rate, predictability, and esthetic preservation. There is a technical sensitivity to performing the full-split design procedure.

The goal was to assess dental students' perception of digital technologies after participating in a CAD/CAM exercise for scanning, designing, and manufacturing computer-aided provisional fixed dental restorations. A survey was conducted among second-year dental students (pre-D2 and post-D2), first- (D1, negative control), third-, and fourth-year dental students (D3 and D4, positive controls). Only OSU College of Dentistry students who completed the activity and completed the surveys were included. Seven questions were rated, which evaluated changes in knowledge, skill, interest, the importance of technology availability in an office, patients' perception of technology, the importance of having the technology, and the expected frequency of clinics utilizing the technology. Statistical analysis was performed with a significance level of 0.05. A total of 74 pre-D2 and 77 post-D2 questionnaires were completed. Additionally, 63 D1, 43 D3, and 39 D4 responded to the survey. Significant differences were found for "knowledge" and "skill" between pre-D2 and post-D2, and pre-D2 and control groups (p<0.001). There was a significant difference between post-D2 and all controls for “interest” (p=0.0127) and on practice preference for technology availability (p<0.05). There were significant results between post-D2 and all controls regarding the importance of technology availability in an office (p<0.001) and the expected frequency of clinics utilizing the technology (p=0.01). No significance was found for "patient's value of technology" and "the importance of having the technology". The presence of technology in the practice and educational academic environments significantly improved students’ interest and perception of knowledge and skill.

There is a considerable increase in the use of substances and medical procedures aimed at changing the esthetics of the face, particularly the appearance of the lips. Permanent fillers such as polydimethylsiloxane, also called liquid silicone, are widely used, but their application for facial esthetics is currently obsolete. However, the long-term complications remain a reality, as they can occur decades after the application. Thus, the goal of this case report was to present a complication after 16 years of treatment using liquid silicone. This case report involved a 52-year-old male with a complication of bilateral permanent filler in the upper lip performed 16 years ago, its surgical removal, and histological analysis. Histologically, it was possible to identify a chronic inflammatory, lymphoplasmacytic, and granulomatous reaction, with foreign body giant cells’ reaction, in relation to non-polarizable exogenous material due to the reaction to silicone. The most common complications are granulomas' appearance and material displacement. The case report shows these granulomas are characterized as chronic low-caliber inflammation around the silicone. They have an unknown etiology but are probably multifactorial, from continuous trauma, friction or irritation, iatrogenic factors, infection, immunological mechanisms, and genetic and molecular variations, and can be highly related to the impurity of the injected material.