Blog

Great white shark DNA study mystifies scientists

Within each of our cells we have two kinds of DNA. We are most familiar with ‘nuclear DNA’, which is what most people mean when they talk about DNA. This DNA is inherited from both parents, and contains the code for almost everything we need to function.

The other type of DNA is called ‘mitochondrial DNA’. As opposed to nuclear DNA, mitochondrial DNA is inherited only from the mother. This DNA is found inside special structures in our cells called mitochondria. Mitochondria generate energy from the food we eat, and mitochondrial DNA contains code that programmes them to do this.

Scientists can use both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA to understand the evolutionary history of a species. They do this by looking, for example, at how similar DNA of the same type is between populations. If DNA between populations is very different, this suggests that the populations have not interbred much in the past. If it is very similar, this suggests that populations have interbred, and/or are currently interbreeding.

Usually, both nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA tell the same evolutionary story. But sometimes, they tell opposing stories. This is called ‘mitonuclear discordance’.

An example of mitonuclear discordance is where nuclear DNA is very similar between some populations, suggesting that those populations regularly interbreed, while mitochondrial DNA is very different between those populations, suggesting that those populations do not mix. This is a pattern seen in several shark species.

For a long time, scientists thought that mitonuclear discordance in these shark species was due to a difference in mating behaviour between the sexes. Females tend to breed in the place they were born, while males tend to roam around and breed wherever they can. This means that nuclear DNA, inherited from both males and females, becomes well-mixed across populations, but mitochondrial DNA, which is inherited only from females, remains specific to each population.

A recent study on great white sharks has thrown this theory up in the air, though.

Differences between the nuclear and mitochondrial DNA of white sharks, once thought to be caused by their migration patterns, is likely caused by another — as of yet unknown — factor, say the researchers. Credit: Greg Skomal

In the new study, the researchers first confirmed what previous research has found: that in great white sharks, nuclear DNA suggests some populations interbreed, while mitochondrial DNA suggests these populations do not mix much. Then, using state-of-the-art simulations, they tested the theory that this mitonuclear discordance is because females breed where they are born while males do not. They found no support for this theory.

Female great white sharks do tend to breed where they are born, and males do tend to roam around, but this does not explain the opposing stories their DNA tells.

Now that we know that the mating behaviour of the sexes is not the cause of mitonuclear discordance in great white sharks, the research team suggest we need to rethink this assumption across shark species.

“We would like to dig more into the potential selective processes shaping the mitonuclear discordance,” lead author of the study, Romuald Laso-Jadarta, tells BBC Widlife. This would require more data, which means more wild great whites need to be sampled.

Until that happens, there aren’t any other theories to really sink our teeth into. All we know is that something a bit fishy is going on with shark DNA, and more research needs to done to figure out why.

Top image: great white shark. Credit: Getty

More amazing wildlife stories from around the world

Continue Reading

August 11, 2025
Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Genotype Distribution in Patients with Emphysema

Introduction

Alpha-1 antitrypsin (AAT) is a serine proteinase inhibitor synthesized from hepatocytes in the liver that plays a protective role against proteolytic enzymes in the body. In particular, AAT inhibits neutrophil elastase (NE) secreted by activated neutrophils during infectious processes and helps to prevent tissue damage. It also inhibits the action of other proteolytic enzymes, such as cathepsin G and proteinase 3.¹

Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD) is a genetic disorder caused by mutations in SERPINA1 and is characterized by decreased AAT levels. AATD is one of the most common inherited lung diseases. Patients with AATD typically present with symptoms of emphysema at a younger age than those with smoking-related COPD. Although some have a significant history of tobacco use, the disease may also occur in never-smokers. Emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, and bronchiectasis are all lung diseases associated with AATD.^2,3

Emphysema is a chronic disease of the lower respiratory tract characterized by the expansion of air spaces distal to the terminal bronchioles as a result of the destruction of alveolar walls.⁴ Although this disease is associated with environmental factors such as smoking and air pollution, genetic factors also play an important role. AATD is a known genetic cause of emphysema.⁵ Early findings of AATD in the lungs revealed emphysema. Currently, it is being diagnosed at a higher rate with the increasing use of computed chest tomography.⁶ AATD-related emphysema classically involves the lower lobes and causes Panaciner-type emphysema.⁷

The frequency of AATD has been studied in different parts of the world in chronic lung diseases, such as COPD, asthma, and bronchiectasis, and its frequency has been determined at different rates. Less than 10% of individuals with AATD are diagnosed, and the time between symptom onset and diagnosis is often prolonged.⁸ Few studies have been conducted on patients with emphysema, and patient characteristics have not been adequately defined.

In Turkey, the prevalence of AATD has been reported to range between 3% and 5% in patients with chronic lung diseases. Studies have identified both common mutations such as PIM/Z and PIZ/Z and rare alleles like PIM Malton and PIP Lowell in the Turkish population. These findings highlight the genetic variability in AATD across different regions of Turkey and underscore the importance of genotype-based evaluations in emphysema patients.^9–11

This study was conducted to determine the frequency of AATD, a genetic cause of emphysema, in patients with emphysema, to show the distribution of AATD genotypes by the type and localization of emphysema, and to evaluate patients in terms of augmentation therapy.

Materials And Methods

This cross-sectional descriptive study included patients with emphysema on high-resolution chest tomography (HRCT) between 01.12.2022 and 31.12.2024 in the chest diseases clinic of the Samsun Training and Research Hospital.

Inclusion Criteria

Patients who agreed to participate in the study, provided informed consent, and had emphysema on HRCTwere included in the study.

Exclusion Criteria

Patients Who Refused to Give Fingertip Blood

Approval was obtained from the Samsun University Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Date: 08.01.25, Decision No: 2025/1/10). This study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.Written informed consent was obtained from all the patients after they were informed of their condition.

Based on the relevant literature, the AAT genotyping test simultaneously identified the 14 most common allele variants associated with AAT deficiency. This test is based on genomic DNA amplification using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and subsequent hybridization with allele-specific probes by utilizing Luminex xMAP technology. Dried blood spot samples collected from the fingertips of patients with emphysema were screened for Alpha-1 Antitrypsin (AAT) genotype deficiency. Genotype analysis (AlphaKits^®; GE Healthcare Ltd., Cardiff, CF147YT, UK) was conducted at the Progenika Clinical Diagnostics Laboratory in Spain. The alleles examined in the patients included PI*I, PI*M procida, PI*M malton, PI*S iiyama, PI*Q0 granite falls, PI*Q0 west, PI*Q0 bellingham, PI*F, PI*P lowell, PI*S, PI*Z, PI*Q0 mattawa, PI*Q0 clayton and PI*M heerlen.

During screening, demographic characteristics (age and sex), smoking status (smoker, ex-smoker, and non-smoker), types of emphysema (centriacinar emphysema, panacinar emphysema, and paraseptal emphysema), and location (upper, middle, and lower lobes) were recorded.

Smoking Status

Non-smokers; those who had never smoked

Ex-smokers; those who had quit smoking for at least one year

Current smokers; those who still smoke

Types of Emphysema¹² Figure 1.

Figure 1 Types of emphysema (A). Centriacinar emphysema (B). Panacinar emphysema (C). Paraseptal emphysema.

A. Centriacinar emphysema: characterized by the destruction of the proximal respiratory bronchioles, while the distal alveolar sacs and ducts remain normal.

B. Panacinar emphysema: characterized by the destruction of proximal respiratory bronchioles, distal alveolar ducts, and sacs.

C. Paraseptal emphysema: Characterized by destruction of the distal alveolar sacs and ducts, while the proximal respiratory bronchioles are preserved.

AAT levels and pulmonary function tests were evaluated in patients with AAT genotype deficiency during stable periods (no exacerbation and normal CRP levels). Pulmonary function tests were performed to assess the clinical relevance and phenotypic expression of AAT genotype deficiencies.

Lung function tests were performed in accordance with European Respiratory Society (ERS) recommendations. Spirometry was conducted using standardized equipment, and the results were expressed as percentages of the predicted reference values based on ERS standards. Pre-bronchodilator values were used in the analysis. FEV₁, FVC, and FEV₁/FVC ratios were recorded and analyzed.

Patients were assessed for eligibility for augmentation therapy based on their AAT levels and clinical status.

Statistical Analysis

All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 22 for Windows program (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The frequencies and percentages of categorical variables and the mean, median, and standard deviation of the numerical variables were calculated.

Results

Between 01.12.2022 and 31.12.2024, 794 patients with emphysema with a mean age of 61.4±10.5/year (Male: 61.8±10.5, Female: 56.6±9.9) were evaluated. Sixty-six (8.3%) patients were female, and 728 (91.7%) were male. Regarding the smoking status, 586 (73.8%) were smokers, 165 (20.8%) were ex-smokers, and 43 (5.4%) were non-smokers. Upper lobe involvement (n=784, 98.7%) and panacinar emphysema (n=443, 55.8%) were most common (Table 1).

Table 1 Demographic Characteristics of Patients with Emphysema

In the AAT genotyping results, no mutations were detected in 763 (96.1%) patients, while AATD mutations were detected in 31 (3.9%) patients. Although AATD was more common in panacinar emphysema (n=24, 3%), no mutations were observed in paraseptal emphysema (Table 2). In the PI*Z/Z and PI*Z/M malton genotypes, emphysema was observed in all lobes and panacinar types (Table 3).

Table 2 Genotype Distribution According to Emphysema Type

Table 3 Genotype Distribution According to Emphysema Localization

The characteristics of patients with defects in SERPINA1 based on genotype distribution are presented in Table 4. Of the patients with detected mutations, 5 were female and 26 were male. Fourteen patients were smokers, 14 were ex-smokers, and 3 were non-smokers. Panaciner-type emphysema was detected in 2 non-smokers, while centriacinar-type emphysema was observed in 1 patient. The most common mutations were PI*M/M malton (n=9), PI*M/Z (n=7), PI*M/I (n=4), and PI*M malton/M malton (n=4). Serum AAT levels of the patients with AATD were found to be 0.85±0.44 g/L. AAT level was found to be low in PI*Z/Z, PI*M malton/M malton and PI*Z/M malton genotypes (0.20±0.2 g/L). In pulmonary function tests, the mean FEV₁ was 1.68±0.85 mlt (57±26.8%). None of the patients diagnosed with AATD were receiving augmentation therapy. Six patients received augmentation therapy for AATD: three had PI*Z/Z, two had PI*M malton/M malton, and one had the PI*Z/M malton genotype. It was determined that 3 patients received treatment approval with off-label application.

Table 4 Characteristics of Patients with Alpha 1 Antitrypsin Deficiency

Discussion

This cross-sectional descriptive study aimed to identify patients with mutations in SERPINA1, a potential genetic cause of emphysema. AATD was detected in 3.9% (n=31) of the patients with emphysema. AATD was associated with panacinar emphysema (3%) and with emphysema involving multiple lobes, predominantly affecting the upper lobes.

Although emphysema is an early finding in AATD, it is difficult to distinguish between non-hereditary emphysema and emphysema caused by AATD.⁷ There is insufficient literature on the AAT genotypes in patients with emphysema. The prevalence and characteristics of these patients are not well known. When the studies were evaluated, AATD was examined in chronic lung diseases, such as COPD, asthma, and bronchiectasis, and the characteristics of patients with emphysema findings were given as sub-results. To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first to examine this number of emphysema cases and evaluate their genotypic characteristics and treatment indications.

Most AATD-related cases are diagnosed when symptoms become evident and at an advanced age, as genotype tests are performed at private centers.^13–15 In studies conducted worldwide^3,16,17 and in Türkiye^9–11 on chronic lung diseases such as COPD, asthma, and bronchiectasis, the age of AATD diagnosis was advanced. In our study, AATD was detected at an advanced age, similar to other studies (60.2±9.4 / year).

Notably, all individuals with the PiMZ genotype in our cohort were either current or former smokers. This supports previous findings indicating that the PiMZ genotype alone may not be sufficient to cause emphysema but becomes clinically significant when combined with tobacco exposure. Mild AAT deficiency may predispose individuals to disease progression under oxidative stress from cigarette smoke.⁸ Therefore, Pi*MZ should be considered a genotype that warrants intervention, particularly in the context of active or past smoking.

The normal allele for AAT is PI × MM. More than 120 SERPINA 1 mutations have been reported in the literature for AATD, and the most common alleles consist of a combination of M, Z, and S alleles (PI*SS, PI*MZ, PI*SZ, and PI*ZZ).² In the study of Veith et al which examined the genotypes of 18736 patients diagnosed with COPD/emphysema, asthma and bronchiectasis, the genotype distribution in COPD/emphysema was determined as PI*MZ 2704 (22.01%), PI*ZZ 1120 (9.12%), PI*MS 557 (4.53%), PI*SZ 306 (2.49%), PI*Z/rare 202 (1.64%), PI*M/rare 142 (1.16%), PI*SS 33 (0.27%).¹⁶ In this study, COPD and emphysema were not analyzed separately, and the type and localization of emphysema were not examined. Lopez-Campos et al evaluated materials collected from six countries between 2018 and 2022 in 15,230 COPD patients, 3,381 poorly controlled asthma patients, and 1,435 bronchiectasis patients, and the most common allele combinations were MS (14.7%), MZ (8.6%), SS (1.9%), SZ (1.9%), and ZZ (0.9%).¹⁷ In a study conducted by Ale-Müniya et al on 1107 patients with COPD, AATD was detected in 144 patients (13.01%). Most mutations were PI*M/S (n=113, 78.5%) and PI*M/Z (n=14, 9.2%). Seventeen patients had at least one Z allele (11.8%) and one patient had a ZZ mutation.³ A study by Çörtük et al on 196 patients with COPD and 14 patients (7.1%). Among the common allele combinations, PI*M/Z was detected in three patients (1.53%) and PI*Z/Z in one patient (0.51%), whereas the S allele combination was not detected. PIM/Malton was identified as a rare allele in 3 patients (1.53%), PIM/I in 3 patients (1.53%), PIM/Plowell in 2 patients (1.02%), PIM/procida in 1 patient (0.51%), and a single-point mutation (GRCh38) g.94378611 in 1 patient (0.51%).¹⁰ Onur et al evaluated 1,088 patients with COPD, asthma, and bronchiectasis and AATD was detected in 51 patients (5%). In 15 patients (29.4%), variants combining common S or Z alleles were detected in 36 patients (70.6%), whereas rare alleles (PIM Malton, PIP Lowell, PIM Heerlen, and PIS Iiyama). The most frequent combinations were PI*M/Z (n=12, 24%) and PI*M/M males (n=11, 22%). Among 51 patients with AATD, 19 had emphysema.⁹ No information was available regarding the type and localization of emphysema.

In a study conducted by Onur et al on 596 patients with COPD, AATD was observed in 21 (3.52%). The most common mutations were PI*M/Plowell (23.8%, n=5), PI*M/S (23.8%, n=5), PI*M/I (19%, n=4), PI*M/Malton (14.3%, n=3), PI*Z/Z (9%, n=2), PI*M/Z (4.8%, n=1), and Kayseri/Kayseri (4.8%, n=1) mutations. Computed chest tomography revealed that 85.7% (n=18) of patients with AATD had emphysema, 55% (n=10) of patients with emphysema only had upper-lobe emphysema, and 83.3% (n=15) had emphysema in additional areas.¹¹ No information was available regarding the type of emphysema or genotype distribution.

In our study, the AATD genotypes in patients with emphysema were PI*M/M malton (n=9), PI*M/Z (n=7), PI*M/I (n=4), PI*M malton/M malton (n=4), PI*M/I (n=4), PI*Z/Z (n=3), PI*M/P low (n=3), and PI*Z/M malton (n=1). The frequency and genotype distribution of AATD in patients with emphysema in the present study were similar to those reported by Türkiye et al. Unlike other studies. Interestingly, the M Malton/M Malton genotype was identified in 4 out of 794 patients (0.5%), higher than the frequency of the PiZZ genotype in our sample. This unexpected finding suggests a possible regional or ethnic variation in rare SERPINA1 mutation frequencies. Such variation may have important implications for the design of genetic screening programs. In populations where rare mutations such as M Malton are more prevalent, targeted sequencing approaches may be more effective than focusing solely on the most common variants. AAT genotyping was performed based on the type of bronchiectasis. The most frequently observed alleles in panacinar emphysema were PIM/Z, PIM/M Malton, PIM Malton/M Malton, and PIZ/Z. In centriacinar emphysema, the PIM/M Malton and PIM/I alleles were detected, whereas no mutations were observed in paraseptal emphysema. In the PI*Z/Z and PI*Z/M malton genotypes, emphysema was observed in all lobes and panacinar types.

Augmentation therapy (a human Alpha-1-Proteinase inhibitor) in AATD has been used for approximately 38 years. The benefits of augmentation therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and pulmonary emphysema due to AATD have been well established. Augmentation therapy has been shown to increase the level of AAT in serum and lung tissue, increase pulmonary anti-neutrophil elastase capacity, slow the progression of emphysema, and reduce the decrease in FEV₁.^4,18–21 Augmentation therapy in Türkiye is paid when it is prescribed to patients with the homozygous PI*Z/Z allele with genetic examination and FEV₁ > 30% in a pulmonary function test or after it is evaluated by the Ministry of Health Board in off-label applications in patients with rare heterozygous mutations. Our study also evaluated patients with emphysema and AATD in terms of augmentation therapy. It was determined that 6 of the patients received augmentation therapy indication for AATD, and 3 patients received treatment approval with off-label admission. It was determined that 3 of Three patients had PI*Z/Z, 2 had PI*M malton/M malton, and 1 had PI*Z/M malton genotype. The AAT levels in patients receiving augmentation therapy were very low and they had panaciner-type emphysema.

The limitations of our study include its single-center retrospective design. In addition, because screening was conducted only in patients with emphysema, there is no possibility of detecting AATD in patients with COPD or asthma without emphysema. One of the main limitations of our study is that smoking exposure was recorded only categorically (current, former, or never smokers), without quantitative data such as cumulative pack-years. This restricts the ability to assess the dose-dependent effect of tobacco exposure on genotype–phenotype correlations.

Our results emphasize the importance of identifying AAT deficiency in emphysema patients. Measurement of serum AAT levels is recommended as the initial step. If levels are found to be low or borderline, genotyping can then be performed to identify specific mutations. Analyzing AAT genotypes in patients with emphysema may provide an early diagnosis of AATD, allowing the application of preventive measures and augmentation therapy strategies. This may slow the progression of the disease and improve quality of life.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

1. Dasí F. Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency. Med Clin. 2024;162(7):336–342. doi:10.1016/j.medcli.2023.10.014

2. American Thoracic Society; European Respiratory Society. American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society statement: standards for the diagnosis and management of individuals with alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2003;168(7):818–900. doi:10.1164/rccm.168.7.818.

3. Alí-Munive A, Leidy P, Proaños NJ, et al. Prevalence of genetic mutations in alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (aatd) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Colombia. BMC Pulm Med. 2023;23(1):156. doi:10.1186/s12890-023-02453-0

4. Wewers MD, Casolaro MA, Sellers SE, et al. Replacement therapy for alpha 1-antitrypsin deficiency associated with emphysema. N Engl J Med. 1987;316(17):1055–1062. doi:10.1056/NEJM198704233161704

5. Janssen R, Piscaer I, Franssen FME, Wouters EFM. Emphysema: looking beyond alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2019;13(4):381–397. doi:10.1080/17476348.2019.1580575

6. Regan EA, Lynch DA, Curran-Everett D, et al. Clinical and radiologic disease in smokers with normal spirometry [published correction appears. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(9):1588. DOI:10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.4706

7. Strnad P, McElvaney NG, Lomas DA. Alpha1-antitrypsin deficiency. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(15):1443–1455. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1910234

8. Stoller JK, Brantly M. The challenge of detecting alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency. COPD. 2013;10 Suppl 1:26–34. doi:10.3109/15412555.2013.763782

9. Tural Onur S, Natoli A, Dreger B, et al. An alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency screening study in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, bronchiectasis, or Asthma in Turkey. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2023;18:2785–2794. doi:10.2147/COPD.S425835

10. Çörtük M, Demirkol B, Arslan MA, et al. Frequency of alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency and unexpected results in COPD patients in Turkey; rare variants are common. Turk J Med Sci. 2022;52(5):1478–1485. doi:10.55730/1300-0144.5486

11. Önür ST. Initial alpha-1 antitrypsin screening in Turkish patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Turk J Med Sci. 2023;53(4):1012–1018. doi:10.55730/1300-0144.5665

12. Takahashi M, Fukuoka J, Nitta N, et al. Imaging of pulmonary emphysema: a pictorial review. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2008;3(2):193–204. doi:10.2147/copd.s2639

13. Miravitlles M, Nuñez A, Torres-Durán M, et al. The importance of reference centers and registries for rare diseases: the example of alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency. COPD. 2020;17(4):346–354. doi:10.1080/15412555.2020.1795824

14. Gurevich S, Daya A, Da Silva C, Girard C, Rahaghi F. Improving screening for alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency with direct testing in the pulmonary function testing laboratory. Chronic Obstr Pulm Dis. 2021;8(2):190–197. doi:10.15326/jcopdf.2020.0179

15. Tejwani V, Nowacki AS, Fye E, Sanders C, Stoller JK. The impact of delayed diagnosis of alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency: the association between diagnostic delay and worsened clinical status. Respir Care. 2019;64(8):915–922. doi:10.4187/respcare.06555

16. Veith M, Tüffers J, Peychev E, et al. The Distribution of alpha-1 antitrypsin genotypes between patients with copd/emphysema, asthma and bronchiectasis. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2020;15:2827–2836. doi:10.2147/COPD.S271810

17. Lopez-Campos JL, Osaba L, Czischke K, et al. Feasibility of a genotyping system for the diagnosis of alpha1 antitrypsin deficiency: a multinational cross-sectional analysis. Respir Res. 2022;23(1):152. doi:10.1186/s12931-022-02074-x

18. Wencker M, Fuhrmann B, Banik N, Konietzko N. Wissenschaftliche Arbeitsgemeinschaft zur Therapie von Lungenerkrankungen. Longitudinal follow-up of patients with alpha(1)-protease inhibitor deficiency before and during therapy with IV alpha(1)-protease inhibitor. Chest. 2001;119(3):737–744. doi:10.1378/chest.119.3.737

19. Survival and FEV₁ decline in individuals with severe deficiency of alpha1-antitrypsin. the alpha-1-antitrypsin deficiency registry study group. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998;158(1):49–59. doi:10.1164/ajrccm.158.1.9712017

20. Stockley RA, Parr DG, Piitulainen E, Stolk J, Stoel BC, Dirksen A. Therapeutic efficacy of α-1 antitrypsin augmentation therapy on the loss of lung tissue: an integrated analysis of 2 randomised clinical trials using computed tomography densitometry. Respir Res. 2010;11(1):136. doi:10.1186/1465-9921-11-136

21. McElvaney NG, Burdon J, Holmes M, et al. Long-term efficacy and safety of α1 proteinase inhibitor treatment for emphysema caused by severe α1 antitrypsin deficiency: an open-label extension trial (RAPID-OLE) [published correction appears. Lancet Respir Med. 2017;5(2):e13. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(17)30004-8.]

Continue Reading

August 11, 2025
The family tree of F1’s 10 teams and how they came to be

The teams currently on the F1 grid all bring with them very different back stories. From those who have built a storied history, through to some that have been borne out of the ashes of past outfits and others that arrived brand new, we’ve been taking a look at the fascinating family tree of all 10 outfits…

McLaren

In terms of the sport’s most historic names, McLaren is up there amongst them. The team were founded by Bruce McLaren and made their debut back in 1966, with the New Zealander himself at the wheel.

McLaren claimed the first win for his squad at the 1968 Belgian Grand Prix and, following his death whilst testing a Can-Am car in 1970, the team bearing his name have gone on to score a total of 200 Grand Prix victories to date along with nine Teams’ Championships and 12 Drivers’ titles.

The outfit are the second oldest team on the grid, behind another famed name in motorsport history…

Ferrari

Having arrived in Formula 1 when the championship made its debut back in 1950, Ferrari are the only team to have competed in every season since, and in that time the Scuderia have built an illustrious legacy.

Famed for their scarlet livery, the Italian outfit have attracted some of the most famous drivers over the years and collected titles with many of them, including Alberto Ascari, Niki Lauda and Michael Schumacher.

While their last Drivers’ Championship came courtesy of Kimi Raikkonen in 2007 – with the Teams’ crown following in 2008 – Ferrari have well and truly earned their place in the F1 history books.

Mercedes

Mercedes first appeared in Formula 1 back in 1954 and 1955 but, following their withdrawal from motorsport after the latter year, the name did not return as a manufacturer until many years later.

The outfit now known as Mercedes started life as Tyrrell back in 1970, before being purchased by British American Racing in 1998, resulting in the team being rebranded one year on.

Another change came in 2006 when Honda took over but, after the company opted to withdraw at the end of 2008, Ross Brawn famously purchased the squad for one pound, leading to the fairytale championship-winning 2009 season for the Brawn GP squad.

Mercedes acquired the team at the end of that year, meaning that the Silver Arrows name returned for 2010. In the years since, the Brackley-based outfit have achieved seven Drivers’ Championships – six courtesy of Lewis Hamilton – alongside eight Teams’ titles.

Red Bull

The origins of the Red Bull team can be traced back to Stewart Grand Prix, the squad founded by Jackie Stewart that went on to compete in F1 between 1997 and 1999.

When Ford purchased the outfit at the end of the latter year, the team were rebranded as Jaguar, a name that they raced under through to the 2004 season.

Energy drinks company Red Bull then acquired the squad, leading to the team becoming Red Bull Racing in 2005. The rest is history, with the outfit having gone on to win the Teams’ Championship on six occasions and the Drivers’ title a total of eight times, four apiece for Sebastian Vettel and Max Verstappen.

Williams

Another one of Formula 1’s most historic names, Williams made their full-time debut on the grid back in 1978 with Alan Jones at the wheel. The outfit – co-founded by Frank Williams and Patrick Head – went on to experience championship glory for the first time just two years later.

Following plenty of success in the 1980s and 1990s, Williams have struggled to replicate that form in the years since, and a change came for the team in 2020 when they were purchased by Dorilton Capital.

While Frank Williams and daughter Claire stepped back from the team, the squad continue to carry the Williams name as they try to make their way back to the front of the grid.

Aston Martin

Aston Martin briefly competed in F1 for just five races between 1959 and 1960, but the outfit that now carries the brand’s name actually started life as Jordan back in 1991.

Founder Eddie Jordan sold the team to Midland Racing in 2005, who then rebranded under that name in 2006. The squad were subsequently acquired by Spyker, leading to another name change for the 2007 campaign.

Just one year on, the outfit became Force India after another buyout, a moniker that they raced under through to 2018. A consortium led by Lawrence Stroll took over during that final year to bring the struggling team out of administration, and another rebrand as Racing Point followed in 2019.

After Stroll’s consortium took a 16.7% stake in Aston Martin, the team took on the famous manufacturer’s name from 2021 onwards.

Kick Sauber

The Sauber name first arrived in Formula 1 in 1993, with Karl Wendlinger and JJ Lehto forming the line-up of Peter Sauber’s eponymous squad.

When the team was purchased by BMW at the end of 2005, they began racing under the BMW Sauber moniker in 2006. However, after the manufacturer decided to withdraw from the sport at the close of 2009, the squad was sold back to Peter Sauber and returned to his name.

After partnering with Alfa Romeo in 2018, the team rebranded as Alfa Romeo Racing from 2019 onwards, a name that remained until the Italian brand exited after 2023.

While the team have been known as Kick Sauber since 2024, a big change is on the horizon next season when the squad will become Audi’s works outfit, coinciding with a new era of technical regulations coming into effect in the sport.

Racing Bulls

Another team that has seen its fair share of identity changes is Racing Bulls. The life of the outfit actually goes back to 1985 and the arrival of Minardi, the Italian squad that remained on the grid through to the end of 2005.

Red Bull – off the back of purchasing the former Jaguar outfit – acquired Minardi ahead of the 2006 season, with the company deciding to run a second ‘junior’ team in which they would develop young talent.

After making their debut under the Toro Rosso name, a rebranding saw the squad become AlphaTauri in 2020, which then changed to RB in 2024 before evolving into Racing Bulls for the 2025 campaign.

Haas

The newest team to arrive in Formula 1, Haas – established by American founder Gene Haas – entered the sport in 2016, having purchased the Banbury base of the former Marussia outfit to use as their headquarters in the United Kingdom.

With the line-up of Romain Grosjean and Esteban Gutierrez, Haas enjoyed the strongest debut of a new team in this century after placing in a respectable P8 of the Teams’ Championship, before recording their best finish to date in 2018 with P5 at the end of the year.

While they have faced some highs and lows in the time since, the squad bounced back from a last place result in 2023 to become regular points scorers again in 2024, ending that campaign in seventh place.

Alpine

Alpine are another team to carry a long history of name changes over the years. The origins of the outfit go right back to 1981 when Toleman arrived on the grid, the squad that famously gave Ayrton Senna his debut in 1984.

After being purchased by Benetton, they took the moniker of the Italian fashion brand in 1986. It was under this guise that the team experienced great success in the mid-1990s, with Michael Schumacher claiming back-to-back Drivers’ Championships in 1994 and 1995.

The outfit became Renault in 2002 following their acquisition by the French manufacturer, with Fernando Alonso taking the Drivers’ title in 2005 and 2006, before they changed to Lotus in 2012. Four years later, Renault took over again, a name that remained through to the end of 2020.

As of 2021, the company decided to rebrand the F1 team as Alpine. The squad have faced mixed fortunes in the years since, but have collected six podiums along the way as well as a surprise victory courtesy of Esteban Ocon at the 2021 Hungarian Grand Prix.

Cadillac

While there are currently 10 teams on the grid, it is worth noting that another name will join the family as of 2026.

Cadillac are set to become F1’s newest arrival next season. It was first confirmed in November 2024 that Formula 1 had reached an agreement in principle with General Motors (GM) to support bringing GM/Cadillac to the grid in the 2026 season.

The Cadillac Formula 1 Team then received final approval in March 2025 to join the sport next year, with the squad set to be led by Team Principal Graeme Lowdon, while General Motors and TWG Motorsports are also building a power unit facility which will ultimately make the Cadillac team a full-works operation.

Continue Reading

August 11, 2025
Trump’s massive tariff hike triggers boycott calls for US products in India

A person holds effigy with US President Donald Trump and Indian PM Narendra Modi posters. — APF/File

NEW DELHI: Several US companies operating in India are now facing boycott calls in the South Asian nation with business executives and Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s supporters stoking anti-American sentiment to protest against import duties imposed by Washington.

India, the world’s most populous nation, is a key market for American brands that have rapidly expanded to target a growing base of affluent consumers, many of whom remain infatuated with international labels seen as symbols of moving up in life.

India, for example, is the biggest market by users for Meta’s WhatsApp and a popular pizza chain has more restaurants than any other brand in the country.

US-based beverage companies often dominate store shelves, and people still queue up when a new smartphone store opens or a coffee shop doles out discounts.

Although there was no immediate indication of sales being hit, there’s a growing chorus both on social media and offline to buy local and ditch American products after Donald Trump imposed a 50% tariff on goods from India, rattling exporters and damaging ties between New Delhi and Washington.

Manish Chowdhary, co-founder of a local company selling skin-care products, took to LinkedIn with a video message urging support for farmers and startups to make “Made in India” a “global obsession,” and to learn from South Korea, whose food and beauty products are famous worldwide.

“We have lined up for products from thousands of miles away. We have proudly spent on brands that we don’t own, while our own makers fight for attention in their own country,” he said.

Rahm Shastry, CEO of a local company which provides a car driver on call service, wrote on LinkedIn: “India should have its own home-grown Twitter/Google/YouTube/WhatsApp/FB — like China has”.

To be fair, Indian retail companies give foreign brands stiff competition in the domestic market, but going global has been a challenge.

Indian IT services firms, however, have become deeply entrenched in the global economy, with the likes of TCS and Infosys providing software solutions to clients worldwide.

On Sunday, Modi made a “special appeal” for becoming self-reliant, telling a gathering in Bengaluru that Indian technology companies made products for the world but “now is the time for us to give more priority to India’s needs”, however, he did not name any company.

BJP-linked group holds boycott rallies

Even as anti-American protests simmer, Tesla launched its second showroom in India in New Delhi, with Monday’s opening attended by Indian commerce ministry officials and US embassy officials.

The Swadeshi Jagran Manch group, which is linked to Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), took out small public rallies across India on Sunday, urging people to boycott American brands.

“People are now looking at Indian products. It will take some time to fructify,” Ashwani Mahajan, the group’s co-convenor, told Reuters. “This is a call for nationalism, patriotism”.

He also shared with Reuters a table his group is circulating on WhatsApp, listing Indian brands of bath soaps, toothpaste and cold drinks that people could choose over foreign ones.

On social media, one of the group’s campaigns is a graphic titled “Boycott foreign food chains”, with logos of many restaurant brands.

In Uttar Pradesh, Rajat Gupta, 37, who was dining at a US-based restaurant chain in Lucknow on Monday, said he wasn’t concerned about the tariff protests and simply enjoyed the INR49 ($0.55) coffee he considered good value for money.

“Tariffs are a matter of diplomacy and my coffee should not be dragged into it,” he said.

Continue Reading

August 11, 2025

Why Asia Cup 2025 will be played in T20I format

Asia Cup 2025 will begin on 9th September.

After the test season, it’s now time for some T20I action as Asia’s biggest championship is around the corner. Asia Cup 2025 is all set to be played in September in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

Asia Cup 2025 will kick start on 9th September and will run till the end of the month, with the final set to take place on 28th September. This will be the 17th edition of the tournament, and like the last seasons, it is expected to be a blockbuster.

The first edition of the tournament was played in 1984 when the Asian Cricket Council (ACC) was founded. It was introduced to promote cricket in Asia, and since then, several teams from the continent have made their presence felt.

Why the Asia Cup 2025 will be played in T20I format

When the Asia Cup was introduced, it was played in the ODI format since the T20I had not yet come into existence. Till 2015, the tournament was played in the 50-over format, but ahead of the start of the 2016 season, it was announced that the format in which the tournament would be played would be on a rotational basis.

It was announced that the format of the tournament will be decided on the basis of the format of upcoming world events. This is the reason why the Asia Cup was played in the T20I format for the first time in 2016 since the ICC T20 World Cup 2016 was next to follow.

With the ICC T20 World Cup 2026 around the corner, the upcoming edition of the Asia Cup will be played in T20I format. The last edition was played in the ODI format, as it was played a few months ahead of the ICC Cricket World Cup 2023.

Asia Cup winners

Indian Cricket Team at ICC Champions Trophy 2025. (Image Source: BCCI)

India are the most successful team in the Asia Cup. They have won the title record eight times and are followed by Sri Lanka, who have six titles. Pakistan are there too with two cups.

Year	Hosts	Winners	Runners-up
1984	UAE	India	Sri Lanka
1986	Sri Lanka	Sri Lanka	Pakistan
1988	Bangladesh	India	Sri Lanka
1990/1991	India	India	Sri Lanka
1995	UAE	India	Sri Lanka
1997	Sri Lanka	Sri Lanka	India
2000	Bangladesh	Pakistan	Sri Lanka
2004	Sri Lanka	Sri Lanka	India
2008	Pakistan	Sri Lanka	India
2010	Sri Lanka	India	Sri Lanka
2012	Bangladesh	Pakistan	Bangladesh
2014	Bangladesh	Sri Lanka	Pakistan
2016	Bangladesh	India (T20I)	Bangladesh
2018	UAE	India	Bangladesh
2022	UAE	Sri Lanka (T20I)	Pakistan
2023	Pakistan/Sri Lanka	India	Sri Lanka

When will Asia Cup 2025 begin?

Asia Cup 2025 will begin on 9th September.

Which team has won the Asia Cup the most times?

India have with eight titles have won the most number of titles.

For more updates, follow Khel Now Cricket on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Youtube; download the Khel Now Android App or IOS App and join our community on Whatsapp & Telegram.

Continue Reading

August 11, 2025

Atlas may not be a typical comet, could be alien mission, says Harvard physicist

A comet visiting our solar system from another star is only the third known interstellar object to pass our way. The approach of 3I/Atlas has sparked interest and curiosity in the astro community, but one prominent Harvard physicist has raised the possibility that it is more than a typical comet.

This image provided by NASA/European Space Agency shows an image captured by Hubble of the interstellar comet 3I/ATLAS on July 21, 2025, when the comet was 277 million miles from Earth. (NASA/European Space Agency via AP)(AP)

Avi Loeb, the chair of the astronomy department at Harvard, has suggested that the Manhattan-sized interstellar object could be an alien probe on a “reconnaissance mission”.

A comet or an alien probe?

Loeb raised the possibility that the trajectory of the interstellar object – which has been travelling through space for millions, possibly billions, of years – was “designed”.

“Maybe the trajectory was designed,” the Harvard physicist told Fox News Digital. “If it had an objective to sort of to be on a reconnaissance mission, to either send mini probes to those planets or monitor them… It seems quite anomalous.”

According to scientists, the object is over 12 miles wide and moving at a pace of 37 miles per second. NASA states that it could be within about 130 million miles of the Earth on October 30, USA Today reported. It was first detected in July by the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System, or ATLAS, telescope located in Chile.

(Also read: Rare interstellar object zooming through solar system: All about the mysterious 3I/Atlas)

What makes Atlas an unusual comet?

NASA has classified 3I/Atlas as a comet. Loeb, however, says that an unexpected glow appears in front of the object rather than trailing behind it. This he called “quite surprising”.

“Usually with comets you have a tail, a cometary tail, where dust and gas are shining, reflecting sunlight, and that’s the signature of a comet,” Loeb told Fox News Digital. “Here, you see a glow in front of it, not behind it.”

The Harvard physicist also said that the object is unusually bright for a comet, but the strangest bit about it is its trajectory.

“If you imagine objects entering the solar system from random directions, just one in 500 of them would be aligned so well with the orbits of the planets,” he said.

Loeb pointed out that 3I/Atlas is expected to pass near to Mars, Venus and Jupiter. He says it is highly improbable that this trajectory happened at random. “It also comes close to each of them, with a probability of one in 20,000,” he said.

“If it turns out to be technological, it would obviously have a big impact on the future of humanity,” Loeb said. “We have to decide how to respond to that.”

Continue Reading

August 11, 2025
Best MacBook deal: Save $200 on 15-inch 2025 MacBook Air M4

SAVE $200: As of Aug. 11, the 15-inch 2025 Apple MacBook Air M4 is on sale for $999 at Amazon. That’s the lowest-ever price for this model.

Apple’s 2025 MacBook Air has seen some incredible deals over the last few months, but this latest discount beats them all. As of Aug. 11, you can get the 15-inch MacBook Air for under $1,000. Right now it’s priced at just $999. That’s its lowest-ever price according to price tracker camelcamelcamel. The deal applies to all colors too, so you can choose between starlight, midnight, silver, and sky blue.

This price is only for the 16GB option. Need something bigger? You’re in luck — all memory sizes are reduced by $200.

SEE ALSO:

Apple may launch App Intents alongside the upgraded Siri next spring

This is one of the best-ever MacBook’s, and the newest in the Air range. It’s powered by Apple’s new M4 chip, meaning it’s both fast and efficient. This means it can handle things like video editing, jumping between apps, and working through heavy multiple-tab workloads, without having to endure lag. It’s also created with Apple Intelligence, Apple’s personal AI system that helps you get more work done in less time.

This model also boasts a 15.3-inch Liquid Retina display that supports 1 billion colors, so enjoy seriously high-quality pictures at all times. Other standout features include a 12MP Center Stage camera, a three-mic setup, and a six-speaker system with Spatial Audio, so you’ll always look your best on work calls. And you get 18 hours of battery life, so you can work on the go without a worry.

Mashable Deals

Sold yet? Get it at Amazon now.

Continue Reading

August 11, 2025
Diabetes risk hinges on how you cook potatoes
New evidence from decades of data reveals why your method of potato cooking, or what you swap it for, could make a big difference to your long-term diabetes risk.

Study: Total and specific potato intake and risk of type 2 diabetes: results from three US cohort studies and a substitution meta-analysis of prospective cohorts. Image credit: Alexeysun/Shutterstock.com

A study in the BMJ evaluated whether total and individual potato intake differentially impacts type 2 diabetes (T2D) and assessed the effect of replacing potatoes with whole grains and other major carbohydrate sources on T2D.

Potato consumption and T2D risks

Potatoes are the third most consumed food, providing substantial daily energy. They contain various nutrients, such as vitamin C, fiber, potassium, polyphenols, and magnesium. However, the high starch content of potatoes can increase the glycemic index, thereby elevating the risk of metabolic diseases. Furthermore, specific cooking methods also decrease their nutrient content.

Although previous studies have investigated the association between potato consumption and T2D, their findings have remained inconclusive. For instance, some studies have shown a positive correlation between potato consumption and T2D, while others have observed an inverse association. A US-based individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis revealed no association between T2D and total potato intake but a modest increased risk with fried potato intake.

Inconsistency in the effect of T2D was observed when potatoes were replaced with alternative carbohydrates, whole grains, and non-starchy vegetables. These inconsistencies in research findings could stem from variations in methodology, regional differences in potato consumption, and inadequate control for confounding variables.

Considering the contradictory findings regarding the association between potato consumption and T2D, long-term observational studies with standardized methodologies and high-quality data are needed.

About the study

In the last four decades, the Nurses’ Health Study (NHS), Nurses’ Health Study II (NHSII), and Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS) have repeatedly assessed the impact of diet and other variables on health. The current study utilized the above three cohorts to evaluate the effects of total and specific potato intake and T2D risk and compare the associations of potatoes and whole grains with T2D risk.

The NHS, NHSII, and HPFS cohorts were initiated in 1976, 1989, and 1986. They contain a sample of male and female registered nurses between 25 and 75.

Participants in these cohorts were initially surveyed using questionnaires, which obtained information about their new diagnosis of T2D, lifestyle, diet, and health. Dietary intake was reassessed every two to four years, and cumulative average intake was used in the main analysis to better capture long-term patterns. Those with incomplete information about age or potato intake were excluded.

Participants were asked whether they consumed potatoes as baked, boiled, mashed, French fries, or as potato or corn chips. Portion sizes were adjusted over time using weights from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Total potato intake was measured by adding the servings of baked, boiled, or mashed potatoes and French fries, excluding potato or corn chips because they were grouped in the questionnaire and could not be separated.

Study findings

A total of 22,299 individuals were diagnosed with T2D. Men and women who reported higher potato intake were found to be less likely to be physically active, take supplements, and have a higher total energy intake. In all three cohorts, the average frequency of consuming boiled, baked, or mashed potatoes was considerably higher than that of French fries. A pooled analysis revealed a positive but modest association between total potato intake and a higher risk of T2D.

Participants who reported consuming seven or more servings of total potatoes weekly had a 12% higher risk of T2D than those with less than one serving weekly. An increase of three servings weekly of total potatoes elevated the risk of developing T2D by 5%. However, this risk varies depending on the cooking method.

Compared to those who almost never consumed French fries, those who consumed five or more servings weekly showed a 27% increased risk of T2D. Every three additional servings of French fries weekly was associated with a 20% higher incidence of T2D. Dose-response analysis revealed a linear association, indicating that a steady increase in French fry intake increases the risk of T2D.

After multivariable adjustment, no increase in T2D incidence could be linked to baked, boiled, or mashed potato intake or potato or corn chip intake. An increased weekly intake of baked, boiled, or mashed potatoes and potato or corn chips also exhibited a statistically null T2D risk.

Replacing three servings of total potatoes per week with whole grains resulted in an 8% lower T2D rate. More specifically, substituting baked, boiled, or mashed potatoes with whole grains was estimated to lower T2D incidence by 4%. The current study also indicated that substituting total potatoes with non-starchy vegetables, replacing French fries with legumes, starchy and non-starchy vegetables, and even refined grains, leads to a reduced T2D incidence. Replacing total or baked, boiled, or mashed potatoes with white rice was associated with an increased risk of T2D.

The current study conducted a meta-analysis that included 13 prospective cohort studies (out of 503 screened) related to potato intake and the risk of T2D. Out of 587,081 participants across the selected studies, 43,471 individuals were diagnosed with T2D during follow-up, ranging from 4 to 27 years. The T2D risk increased by 16% for each three-serving-per-week increment of fried potatoes. A much weaker association was observed between T2D incidence and the consumption of non-fried potatoes.

Additional analyses showed that body mass index (BMI) mediated about 50% of the association between French fry intake and T2D risk. The association between total potato intake and T2D was strongest 12 to 20 years before diagnosis, and results were more robust when using cumulative average dietary intake rather than baseline-only measurements.

Conclusions

The current study found that French fry consumption primarily drove the association between total potato intake and the risk of T2D. Substitution analysis indicated that replacing total potatoes with whole grains reduces the risk of T2D. However, replacing boiled, baked, or mashed potatoes with white rice increased the risk of T2D. These findings highlight that risk varies by cooking method, the food replacing the potatoes, and individual factors such as BMI.

Download your PDF copy now!
Journal reference:

Mousavi, M.S. et al. (2025) Total and specific potato intake and risk of type 2 diabetes: results from three US cohort studies and a substitution meta-analysis of prospective cohorts. BMJ. 390:e082121. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2024-08212. https://www.bmj.com/content/390/bmj-2024-082121
Continue Reading
August 11, 2025

Dental Professionals’ Attitudes and Knowledge on Radiographic Prescrip

Introduction

Dental implants have become one of the most successful dental treatment modalities, offering patients a reliable option for the replacement of missing teeth. Unlike conventional restorative alternatives, such as removable dentures or fixed bridges, implants provide better stability, functionality, and aesthetics by closely mimicking the natural form and function of teeth.¹ The success of implant therapy is not solely dependent on surgical techniques but also on precise diagnosis, comprehensive treatment planning, and adherence to both radiographic and biological considerations.^2,3 These elements are essential for ensuring long-term clinical success and patient satisfaction, making them indispensable aspects of implant dentistry. Radiographic imaging plays an integral role in the planning and execution of implant therapy. It provides clinicians with critical information about the patient’s oral anatomy, including the quality and quantity of available bone, the location of vital anatomical structures such as nerves and sinuses, and the presence of pathologies or other conditions that may affect implant placement.^4,5 Radiographic examination is not only important in determining the optimal implant size and position but also in minimizing hazards during surgery and allowing post-operative follow-up. For instance, marginal bone level assessment by radiographs is considered one of the basic criteria for evaluating the success of dental implants. This type of assessment is necessary for the early detection of complications such as peri-implantitis and for ensuring the long-term stability of the prosthetic restoration.⁶

Radiographic evaluation has a place in three major phases of implant therapy, namely, presurgical imaging, surgical imaging, and post-prosthetic imaging. The imaging modalities used during the presurgical phase include panoramic radiography, periapical radiographs, and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).⁷ Among these, CBCT has emerged as the gold standard due to its ability to present three-dimensional and high-resolution images of the proposed implant site.⁸ This ability enables the clinician to assess the bone dimensions, the anatomical structures, and the possible risk factors precisely, thus facilitating accurate surgical planning.⁹ During the surgical phase, radiographs are commonly employed to confirm the positioning of the implant using guide pins and to verify its proximity to adjacent anatomical landmarks.¹⁰ Radiographic imaging during the post-prosthetic phase is used to monitor osseointegration, marginal bone loss, and the integrity of the implant-supported restoration.¹¹ While sophisticated imaging techniques have significantly enhanced the precision and predictability of implant therapy, no single modality is ideal for all stages uniformly; thus, a mix-and-match approach is clinically applied in different combinations depending on the case.¹² Professional organizations, such as the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, advocate for cross-sectional imaging, especially CBCT, of prospective implant sites due to its unsurpassed diagnostic capability.¹³ However, compliance with these recommendations is highly variable among practitioners and depends on factors such as the availability of technology, cost, clinical training, and personal preference.¹⁴ This variation indicates that additional studies on the radiographic practices of dental professionals should be conducted to help them adhere to evidence-based guidelines.

Biological parameters, apart from radiographic considerations, also play a critical role in the success of dental implants. The distance between adjacent implants, the distance between a natural tooth and an implant, and the biological width of dental implants are factors essential for the health of the tissues around the implant and the aesthetic outcome.¹⁵ These parameters have a direct impact on the preservation of interproximal bone and dental papilla, which are crucial for the long-term stability of the implant and patient satisfaction.¹⁶ Lack of knowledge or awareness regarding these biological principles may lead to complications, including bone loss and inflammation, affecting the aesthetics and overall treatment outcome.¹⁷ Despite the importance of these factors, knowledge, attitude, and practice of the dental fraternity regarding radiographic considerations and biological parameters in implant therapy remain scant.¹⁸ Clinical practices, influenced by various geographical, economic, and educational factors, further highlight the need for region-specific studies.¹⁹ Identifying these perceived variations is crucial for addressing deficiencies in knowledge or practice and planning targeted interventions to improve standards of care. This study attempts to fill these gaps by exploring the attitudes and practices of dental practitioners concerning radiographic prescriptions in implant therapy and their knowledge regarding biological considerations of implants. The study focuses on practitioners in the region of [region, eg, Western Saudi Arabia] to understand their preferred methods of radiographic assessment across different stages of implant therapy and their understanding of critical biological parameters. The results will provide insights into current practices, identify areas that require improvement, and offer recommendations based on evidence to enhance standards of care in implant dentistry.

In the Middle East, particularly in Saudi Arabia, studies have revealed a growing awareness of the importance of radiographic protocols in implant planning, but also significant variation in clinical practice. Research by Al-Johany et al highlighted that while most practitioners recognized the diagnostic value of CBCT, its use was still limited due to accessibility and cost constraints. A more recent study by Al-Ekrish et al reported improved adoption of CBCT in urban areas of Saudi Arabia but continued reliance on panoramic imaging in less-equipped settings. These regional findings underscore the need to assess current practices and practitioner knowledge within the local context to align with global best practices.

The results of this study also have implications for clinical practice and education: a need to be identified for continuous professional development, increased access to magnification tools in order to improve diagnosis, and the dissemination of best practices through professional organizations.²⁰ This study aims to enable clinicians to reflect more deeply on considerations related to radiography and biology, contributing to the optimization of treatment outcomes and the advancement of implant dentistry in general. Ultimately, this research hopes to bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application, equipping dental practitioners with the ability to provide safe, efficient, and aesthetically pleasing implant treatments, thereby improving patient care and advancing implant dentistry as a field of excellence and innovation.

Materials and Methods

This investigation aimed to assess the attitude and practice of dental professionals in making radiographic prescriptions at different phases of implant treatment, as well as their knowledge pertaining to some critical biological considerations in implant dentistry. In line with this objective, a questionnaire-based survey was administered to a carefully selected sample of dental professionals from various specialties. The methodology followed in this study comprehensively covered the sequential process of participant recruitment, survey development, data collection, and analysis.

Study Design

The present study was cross-sectional survey research designed to investigate the radiographic prescription behavior and knowledge level among dental professionals participating in implant therapy. This design allowed for capturing a snapshot of the current practices and perspectives in a diverse group of participants and provided important insights into clinical trends and possible areas for improvement. Emphasis on the attitudes of the respondents towards radiographic use and biological considerations of implants provided a balance between procedural and theoretical aspects of implantology. The study was conducted in accordance with ethical standards and followed a timeline to ensure the completeness of data collection and analysis.

To ensure the relevance and clarity of the questionnaire, a multi-step validation process was undertaken during its development. Initially, the content of the questionnaire was formulated based on an extensive literature review and expert input from academic staff specializing in implantology and oral radiology at King Abdulaziz University. Following the initial draft, face and content validity were assessed by a panel of five experienced dental professionals representing different specialties. Their feedback was used to refine the wording, eliminate ambiguity, and ensure alignment with the study objectives. Subsequently, a pilot test was conducted with 10 dental professionals who were not included in the final sample. The purpose of the pilot was to evaluate the comprehensibility, relevance, and flow of the questions. Minor revisions were made based on participant feedback to improve clarity and reduce the risk of misinterpretation. While the pilot test helped confirm face and content validity, formal statistical validation measures such as reliability testing (eg, Cronbach’s alpha) were not performed due to the concise structure and categorical nature of the questionnaire. Nonetheless, the iterative feedback-based refinement process contributed to improving the instrument’s overall coherence and applicability to the study population.

Participant Recruitment

The participant group in this study consisted of 70 dental professionals from different specialties, including maxillofacial surgery, prosthodontics, periodontics, restorative dentistry, and implantology. This diverse cohort included both consultants with extensive experience and residents undergoing advanced training, offering a balanced mix of different levels of expertise. Participants were selected based on professional networking, direct invitation, and referral. Inclusion criteria included being active in the respective specialties and involved in treatments related to implants. Participants were divided by specialty and role as follows:

Maxillofacial Surgery: Consultants 6; residents 5.

Prosthodontics: Consultants 15; residents 8.

Periodontics: Consultants 13; residents 10.

Restorative Dentistry: Consultants 3; residents 4.

Implantologists: Specialists in implant dentistry 6.

This large pool of participants ensured wide capture of practices, reflecting individual preferences and specialty-specific trends.

Survey Development

Data was collected using a structured questionnaire specifically developed to achieve the research objectives. The instrument comprised 10 questions with closed-ended answers related to the prescription practices of the study participants and their knowledge of biological aspects of implant therapy. In developing this questionnaire, a comprehensive review of the literature and expert opinions was sought to ensure the best scope of the paper. The areas covered in the questions included:

Occupation: Respondent’s professional role and specialization.

Preferred Radiographic Assessment: Techniques used before single implant therapy.

Preferred Radiographic Assessment: Techniques used before multiple implant therapy.

Intraoperative Radiographic Use: Whether radiographs are taken with the parallel guide pin during implant placement.

Post-Placement Radiographs: Radiographic assessment after implant fixture placement.

Radiographs After Healing Abutment Placement: Practices during the healing phase.

Post-Crown Insertion Radiographs: Assessment following prosthetic restoration.

Peri-implant Biological Distance: Knowledge of optimum spacing for maintaining dental papilla and interproximal bone.

Tooth and Implant Biological Distance: Understanding spacing for adequate interproximal bone and papilla.

Implant Biological Width: Knowledge of biological parameters critical for implant success.

The questionnaire was pretested on a small pilot group of dental professionals to ensure clarity and relevance of questions and wording. Responses from this pilot test were incorporated into the final version of the questionnaire.

Data Collection Procedure

The survey was distributed to the participants through physical and electronic means, depending on each participant’s accessibility and preference. Participants were given specific instructions on how to complete the questionnaire, and confidentiality of their responses was guaranteed. Data collection lasted for 30 days to give participants sufficient time to answer the questions thoughtfully. Follow-up reminders were issued to improve the response rate. The questionnaires were accompanied by a cover letter explaining the study’s objectives, the voluntary basis of participation, and the assurance of confidentiality for the data collected.

Ethical Considerations

Ethical guidelines were strictly followed in this study. Prior to data collection, informed consent was obtained from the participants. They were assured of confidentiality and anonymity, and it was promised that data would only be used for research purposes. No incentives were given to participants, and they were informed about their right to withdraw from the study at any time without any consequences. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Dental school of King Abdulaziz University, the Research Ethics Committee proposal no. 207-01-21, and the study complies with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Data Management and Statistical Analysis

The responses from the questionnaires were collected, and the data were collated and stored in a secured database. Individual responses were anonymized during data entry. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, including frequencies, percentages, and means where appropriate. Radiographic preferences and knowledge-related questions were categorized and analyzed for trends or differences among specialties.

The sample size for this study was determined based on practical feasibility, participant availability, and the goal of capturing a representative distribution across multiple dental specialties. A total of 70 participants were included, comprising consultants and residents from maxillofacial surgery, prosthodontics, periodontics, restorative dentistry, and implantology. Although a formal a priori sample size calculation was not performed, post hoc power analysis indicated that, assuming a medium effect size (w = 0.3) for chi-square tests, the sample size of 70 achieves approximately 70% power at a 5% significance level. For ANOVA tests comparing knowledge levels among five specialty groups, the current sample achieves sufficient power (>80%) to detect large effect sizes (f = 0.4), though it may be underpowered to detect smaller effects. Future studies with larger samples and formalized sample size calculations are recommended to increase statistical power and generalizability of the findings.

The association between participants’ characteristics, such as specialty and experience level, and their radiographic practice and knowledge were analyzed using inferential statistical methods. The tests used during the analysis of differences included chi-square tests and ANOVA tests, at a significance level of p < 0.05. Advanced statistical software was applied in data analysis, and tabular and graphical representations of the results provided insights into interpretations. This exhaustive approach ensured accuracy and reliability of the study findings. A post hoc power analysis was conducted to evaluate the adequacy of the sample size. Using a medium effect size (w = 0.3) for chi-square tests comparing radiographic practices across specialties, the required sample size was estimated at 88 to achieve 80% power at a 5% significance level. The current sample size of 70 achieves approximately 70% power under these assumptions. For ANOVA assessing knowledge differences across five specialty groups, the required sample for detecting a medium effect size (f = 0.25) with 80% power was approximately 200, suggesting that the present study may be underpowered for medium effects. However, for detecting large effects (f = 0.4), the current sample size exceeds the required minimum, achieving over 85% power. These results underscore the need for larger samples in future research to robustly detect smaller effect sizes across subgroups.

Timeline of the Study

The research was conducted over three months, which included the following stages:

Phase 1: Formulation of the questionnaire and its piloting (1 month).

Phase 2: Sampling and administering the survey to the respondents (1 month).

Phase 3: Data collection, entry, and analysis (1 month).

This timeline provided sufficient time for each phase without compromising the quality and depth of the research process.

Importance of the Study

The structured approach followed in this research underlines its importance in assessing and potentially improving clinical practices in implant dentistry. By focusing on radiographic prescription behaviors and biological considerations, this study aims to contribute to improvements in treatment planning and outcomes of implant therapy.

Results

Distribution of Respondents by Occupation

A total of 70 respondents took part in the study. This heterogeneous population of dental professionals was summarized as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Distribution of Respondents by Occupation

The highest representation was by Periodontics Consultants and Prosthodontics Consultants, each constituting 24.3% of the sample. The lowest representation was by Restorative Consultants and Restorative Residents, which comprised only 4.28% each. These findings underline the variety of respondents and reflect the diversity in clinical experience and expertise.

Preferred Radiographic Methods for Single Implant Therapy

Analysis of preferred radiographic methods for single implant therapy (Figure 1) showed some interesting trends. Most of the responders, 43 (61.4%), preferred CBCT as the mainstay of imaging. The next in preference were panoramic radiographs as indicated by 22 (31.4%) respondents, while the least preferred was the periapical radiographs, favored by 5 respondents (7.1%). CBCT dominated the preference due to its higher applicability in three-dimensional imaging, which is necessary for accurate planning of dental implants.¹⁶ Panoramic radiographs are less preferred and thus represent a simpler and cheaper option in resource-constrained settings. The preference for periapical radiographs was limited due to their application in only a few instances because of two-dimensional imaging limitations.

Figure 1 Radiographic Methods for Single Implant Therapy. This pie chart illustrates the preferred radiographic methods for single implant therapy among respondents. The analysis revealed (61.4%) favored CBCT as their primary imaging technique. Panoramic radiographs were the next preferred method, with (31.4%). Periapical radiographs showed (7.1%).

Preferred Radiographic Methods for Multiple Implants Therapy

For multiple implant therapy (Figure 2), CBCT was the overwhelmingly preferred modality, selected by 69 respondents (98.6%). Only one respondent (1.4%) preferred panoramic radiographs for this application. These findings underscore the critical importance of CBCT in complex cases requiring detailed 3D imaging for precise planning and execution.²¹ Panoramic radiographs, while occasionally utilized, were not considered sufficient to meet the demands of multiple implant procedures.

Figure 2 Radiographic Methods for Multiple Implants Therapy. This pie chart illustrates the preferred radiographic methods for multiple implant therapy among respondents. The analysis revealed that CBCT was (98.6%). Only (1.4%) preferred panoramic radiographs for this application.

Correlation Between Occupation and Radiographic Practices

The correlation between occupation and radiographic practices (Figure 3), showed certain trends. In single implant therapy, the use of CBCT was largely by specialists, including Implantologists, Maxillofacial Surgery Residents, Periodontics Consultants, and Periodontics Residents. Prosthodontics Consultants showed the widest variation in their preferences for all three radiographic modalities. Panoramic radiographs were used largely by Prosthodontics Consultants and Residents, whereas periapical radiographs were used exclusively by Prosthodontics Consultants. For multiple implant therapy, CBCT was almost universally preferred in all professions, except for one—a Maxillofacial Surgery Consultant who chose a panoramic radiograph. This strong preference for CBCT indicates its recognition as the gold standard for radiographic assessment in complex cases. These results show a clear correlation between clinical specialization and the choice of radiographic modality, dictated by training, clinical requirements, and the complexity of procedures.

Figure 3 Correlation Between Specialty and Radiographic Practices. This stacked bar chart shows the correlation between occupation and radiographic practices. For single implant therapy, CBCT was favored by specialists, including Implantologists, Maxillofacial Surgery Residents, Periodontics Consultants, and Periodontics Residents. Panoramic radiographs were mainly used by Prosthodontics Consultants and Residents, while periapical radiographs were exclusively used by Prosthodontics Consultants.

Radiographic Practices During Implant Placement

The study also explored radiographic practices during implant placement (Figure 4). Among respondents who actively place implants (42), 81% (34/42) reported taking radiographs with a parallel guide pin, demonstrating a strong preference for this practice to ensure accurate implant positioning. Additionally, 97.6% (41/42) of these respondents reported taking radiographs after implant fixture placement, emphasizing the widespread adoption of this practice to confirm proper implant placement. In contrast, a radiograph is taken after the placement of the healing abutment only by 12.9% (9 respondents), whereas the majority, 87.1%, did not find it necessary. Relating to the insertion of the crown, 47.1% of the respondents who place the crown take a radiograph. This indicates that radiographic confirmation is considered important by almost half the practitioners who perform the procedure.

Figure 4 Radiographic Practices During Implant Placement. This bar chart illustrates the radiographic practices during implant placement among respondents. A significant 81% reported taking radiographs with a parallel guide pin. Additionally, 97.6% of these respondents take radiographs after implant fixture placement. In contrast, only 12.9% take radiographs after the placement of the healing abutment. Regarding the insertion of the crown, 47.1% of the respondents take a radiograph.

Implant Biological Considerations Knowledge

Some of the key biological considerations in implant therapy were assessed (Refer to Table 2). On the optimal biological distance between implants to achieve adequate papilla and interproximal bone, 57 respondents (81.4%) correctly identified 3 mm as the ideal distance. Fewer respondents (14.3%) felt that 2 mm was sufficient, while 4.3% were not sure. On the most biologically compatible width between a tooth and a dental implant, 74.3% of the participants preferred 1.5 mm, while 21.4% preferred 3.0 mm. Again, 4.3% of participants were uncertain as to the best width. This shows that there is reasonable unanimity among the respondents on the maintenance of specific widths to preserve dental papilla and interproximal bone. When questioned about the biological width of dental implants, the respondents chose 2 mm (45.7%) and 3–4 mm (45.7%) almost equally. A few responses (1.4%) were 5–6 mm, and the rest (5.7%) said they did not know. This division indicates variability in understanding or interpretation of the biological width concept.

Table 2 Implant Biological Considerations Knowledge

Results reflected a strong trend toward CBCT for all professions in multiple implant therapy, revealing the acknowledged added value of precision and detail. Occupation was significantly associated with radiographic habits, with clear preferences emanating from specific clinical specialties and procedural complexity. Furthermore, there was a large knowledge of biological considerations in implant practice; a majority identified optimal distances and the biological width as critical to successful outcomes. However, variability in responses indicates that education and standardization of practices in implantology are still required.

Discussion

This survey presents a detailed assessment of attitudes to radiographic prescription in different stages of implant therapy and implant biological considerations knowledge among dental practitioners. The results not only highlight the present clinical practice but also reveal variability and potential deficiencies in both radiographic and biological competence in implantology.

One of the most salient findings from this survey is the overwhelming preference for CBCT as the modality of choice in radiography, especially for multiple implant therapy. Indeed, a full 98.6% of the respondents favored CBCT for such cases, which demonstrates that clinicians recognize the value of this imaging technique in providing detailed three-dimensional visualization of the proposed implant site. This is in agreement with the literature, which states that CBCT is considered the gold standard for implant planning due to its capability for high-resolution imaging of bone structure, anatomical landmarks, and potential risk factors.²² For single implant therapy, although CBCT was still the preferred modality (61.4%), there was more variation, with panoramic radiographs being the second most common technique used (31.4%), followed by periapical radiographs (7.1%). This could reflect clinical needs, cost, or access to advanced imaging modalities. While panoramic radiographs are less precise compared to CBCT, they are usually valued for their wider field of view and lower cost, hence considered practical in resource-limited settings.²³ The infrequent use of periapical radiographs underlines the limited possibilities of this type of imaging modality in implantology, since two-dimensional images provide limited diagnostic capabilities, especially in complicated cases.²⁴ This indicates an increased conformity of the majority to recommendations by professional organizations, such as the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, which recommends cross-sectional imaging for implant site assessment.²⁵ However, variability in radiographic preferences for single implant cases shows that factors like clinical training, accessibility, and personal experience still influence decision-making processes.

In the Middle East, studies have shown a strong preference for CBCT in dental implantology.^26,27 For example, a study conducted in Saudi Arabia found that CBCT was the preferred imaging modality for implant planning due to its superior dimensional accuracy and ability to visualize anatomical structures without superimposition.²⁸ Similarly, in South Africa, a survey revealed that CBCT was commonly used alongside panoramic radiographs for implant planning.^29,30 The emphasis on advanced imaging techniques aligns with our findings, highlighting the importance of detailed visualization for successful implant placement. In India, the use of CBCT in dental implantology is also prevalent.³¹ A study from India indicated that CBCT was the preferred choice for implant planning due to its ability to provide three-dimensional images, which are crucial for accurate diagnosis and treatment planning.³² In the USA, CBCT is widely accepted as the gold standard for implant planning, with many practitioners recognizing its value in providing detailed bone structure visualization and reducing the risk of complications.³³ Our survey findings align well with studies from these regions, showing a strong preference for CBCT in implant therapy. The variability in radiographic preferences for single implant cases and the influence of clinical training, accessibility, and personal experience are consistent across different regions. Additionally, the emphasis on continuous education and standardization of protocols is a common theme in improving clinical practice and patient outcomes.

Radiographic preference analysis demonstrated a significant difference as per the subjects’ specialty and role. CBCT was the majority preference for Implantologists, Maxillofacial Surgery Residents, Periodontics Consultants, and Periodontics Residents in single implant therapy. The use of CBCT, panoramic, and periapical radiographs demonstrated the most varied preferences from the Prosthodontics Consultants. This is probably a reflection of the wider scope of prosthodontic training in both the restorative and surgical aspects of implant therapy. CBCT was the almost unanimous choice for multiple implant therapy across all specialties, except for one panoramic radiograph by the Maxillofacial Surgery Consultant. This strong consensus supports that CBCT plays a crucial role in complex implant cases where detailed imaging is required for precise planning and complication avoidance.³⁴ The response also shows that there is marked variation in radiographic practice with clinical specialization and procedural complexity, with specialists in implant-related fields favoring advanced imaging techniques to attain optimal outcomes.

The questionnaire also sought information on radiographic practices at the time of implant placement and subsequently. Of those in active implant placement practice (42), 81% utilized radiographs with a parallel guide pin to confirm proper positioning intraoperatively. In addition, 97.6% of those in active implant placement took radiographs after implant fixture placement, demonstrating a near unanimous concern for the confirmation of implant placement in order to avoid complications. Radiographic practices during the healing and prosthetic phases of treatment were considerably different. Only 12.9% of the total responses took radiographs after placing a healing abutment; therefore, not very many clinicians judged the imaging stage after the abutment positioning. Comparatively, after the final setting of the crown, this had been done by 47.1%, which evidenced interest in the verification of the situation at that end stage in the prosthesis. These findings point to possible lapses in post-surgical monitoring practices, especially during the healing phase, which may affect the timely detection of complications such as marginal bone loss or peri-implantitis.³⁵

In the evaluation of knowledge about implant biological considerations, promising trends were observed, with the majority of the respondents showing a good understanding of critical parameters. The correct answer to the optimal biological distance between implants was 3 mm, as this spacing maintains interproximal bone and the dental papilla;³³ 81.4% gave this answer. In the same context, the optimal distance between a tooth and an implant was 1.5 mm,³⁶ correctly identified by 74.3%. This agrees with previous guidelines that support proper spacing to avoid the loss of bone and to provide an esthetically pleasing outcome.³⁵ The response about the biological width of dental implants, however, was more heterogeneous. Whereas 45.7% of the respondents chose 2 mm and an equal number chose 3–4 mm, a minority (1.4%) chose 5–6 mm, and 5.7% were not sure. Such variability would appear to suggest that while many clinicians have a basic understanding of the concept of biological width, inconsistencies exist in how the concept is perceived or put into clinical practice. These results point to a need for continued education and standardization in providing a consistent view of biological principles that underpin implant success.

These results have several important implications for clinical practice and education. The strong preference for CBCT underlines the need for improved access to advanced diagnostic tools; this is most true in resource-limited settings where cost and availability are likely to inhibit its use.³⁷ Efforts at promoting the utilization of CBCT should run concurrently with training programs to ensure that clinicians become proficient in the interpretation of three-dimensional imaging and its integration into treatment planning. Variability in radiographic practices during healing and prosthetic phases of treatment suggests that there is an opportunity to standardize protocols and stress the importance of postoperative monitoring. Guidelines and training modules are suggested for professional organizations and educational institutions on these aspects, looking at the enhancement of consistency and quality in care. The biological consideration domain also outlined the areas that required continuous professional development in filling up the gaps and ensuring practices in line with best evidence. Workshops, online courses, and case-based learning are some targeted interventions that could bridge these gaps and reinforce key concepts.

Although this study provides an in-depth insight into the investigation of attitudes and practices of dental professionals, it has its limitations. A sample size of 70, though representative, might be too small to reflect the practices and trends of all the regions and specialties. Studies with larger and more geographically dispersed samples could be done in the future to get a full grasp of the trends in implantology. Moreover, the data in this study were self-reported and thus liable to biases, such as social desirability or recall bias. Future studies would be strengthened in their validity by the use of objective measures, examples being audits of radiographic prescriptions and clinical outcomes. Finally, the emphasis on radiographic and biological considerations represents but one aspect of implant therapy. Future studies can be directed regarding other factors that affect clinical judgment, such as patient wishes, financial circumstances, or implant material and technique development. The study will provide a profound analysis of radiographic practices and knowledge of biological considerations and thus contribute to a better understanding of implantology and the identification of priority areas for further improvement. These findings point to the importance of advanced imaging, standardized protocols, and continuous education in achieving optimum outcomes in implant therapy. Addressing such areas will permit further evolution in implant dentistry and ensure clinicians are better positioned to provide safe, effective, and aesthetically pleasing treatments.

One of the notable limitations of this study is the reliance on self-reported data, which may be subject to response bias, including social desirability and recall bias. Participants might have overreported adherence to best practices or underreported gaps in knowledge to present themselves in a more favorable light. Additionally, the data collection depended on voluntary participation, which introduces the possibility of selection bias. Dental professionals who are more engaged with or interested in implantology may have been more inclined to participate, potentially skewing the results toward those with greater knowledge or more standardized practices. As a result, the findings may not fully represent the broader population of dental practitioners, particularly those less experienced or less involved in implant procedures. Acknowledging these limitations is essential when interpreting the results, and future studies should consider incorporating objective assessments, such as clinical audits or direct observation, and employing random sampling methods to improve representativeness and reduce bias.

Conclusion

Dental implant therapy has become a cornerstone of modern dentistry, with its success heavily reliant on meticulous planning, the use of diagnostic aids, and adherence to biological principles. The study found that dental professionals prefer CBCT for complex and multiple implant cases due to its superior diagnostic capabilities, while panoramic radiographs are favored for single implants due to cost and equipment availability. Consistent intraoperative imaging practices were noted, with radiographs conducted during surgery and post-surgery. However, there was variability in imaging practices during the healing and prosthetic stages. Participants demonstrated strong knowledge of optimal inter-implant distances and spacing between implants and natural teeth, but there was uncertainty regarding the biological width of implants, indicating a need for further education on this topic.

Specialists, including implantologists and periodontists, showed more uniform practices and knowledge compared to general practitioners and residents, who exhibited some knowledge gaps in radiographic decisions and biological parameters. The study emphasizes the importance of evidence-based practices and the standardization of care, with professional bodies and educational institutions playing a crucial role in updating dental professionals on the latest guidelines and training. Future research should explore newer imaging techniques, the correlation between guideline adherence and success rates, and the impact of strategic training on knowledge and practice standardization. Bridging these knowledge gaps and promoting evidence-based practices will advance dental implantology, ensuring precision, safety, and patient satisfaction through collaboration among practitioners, educators, and policymakers.

To translate the findings of this study into meaningful improvements in clinical practice, several actionable recommendations can be made. Educational institutions should integrate comprehensive modules on radiographic protocols and biological principles of implant therapy into undergraduate and postgraduate curricula, with an emphasis on the practical application of CBCT in treatment planning. Regular hands-on workshops and simulation-based training should be implemented to reinforce correct radiographic techniques across different implant stages. For professional organizations, the development and dissemination of standardized clinical guidelines tailored to local practice contexts is essential. Additionally, they should offer continuing education programs, certification courses, and online learning platforms that emphasize evidence-based decision-making and address common knowledge gaps identified in this study—particularly regarding implant biological width and post-prosthetic radiographic monitoring. These efforts will support consistent, high-quality implant care and foster a culture of lifelong learning among dental practitioners.

Disclosure

The author reports no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

1. Smith J, Patel A. Implant dentistry: innovations and best practices. J Oral Health Dent. 2023;78(4):203–215. doi:10.3390/dj12120420

2. De Bruin H, Vandeweghe S, Ruyffelaert C, Cosyn J, Sennerby L. Radiographic evaluation of modern oral implants with emphasis on crestal bone level and relevance to peri-implant health. Periodontol 2000. 2013;62:256–270. doi:10.1111/prd.12004

3. Vadiati Saberi B, Khosravifard N, Ghandari F, Hadinezhad A. Detection of peri-implant bone defects using cone-beam computed tomography and digital periapical radiography with parallel and oblique projection. Imaging Sci Dent. 2019;49:265–272. doi:10.5624/isd.2019.49.4.265

4. Aanenson JW, Till JE, Grogan HA. Understanding and communicating radiation dose and risk from cone beam computed tomography in dentistry. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120:353–360. doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.01.008

5. Reddy RS, Kiran CS, Ramesh T, Kumar BN, Naik RM, Ramya K. Knowledge and attitude of dental fraternity towards cone beam computed tomography in south India – A questionnaire study. Indian J Dent. 2013;4(2):88–94. doi:10.1016/j.ijd.2012.10.003

6. Sakakura CE, Morais JA, Loffredo LC, Scaf G. A survey of radiographic prescription in dental implant assessment. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2003;32:397–400. doi:10.1259/dmfr/20681066

7. Di Murro B, Papi P, Passarelli PC, D’Addona A, Pompa G. Attitude in radiographic post-operative assessment of dental implants among Italian dentists: a cross-sectional survey. Antibiotics. 2020;7:234. doi:10.3390/antibiotics9050234

8. Rai N. CBCT as an emerging gold standard for presurgical planning in implant restorations. J Indian Acad Oral Med Radiol. 2013;25(3):123–127. doi:10.1016/j.joamr.2013.05.002

9. Arai Y, Tammisalo E, Iwai K, Hashimoto K, Shinoda K. Development of a compact computed tomographic apparatus for dental use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1999;28(4):245–248. doi:10.1038/sj/dmfr/4600448

10. Resnik R, Misch C. Radiographic imaging in implant dentistry. Dental Implant Prosthetics. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.joamr.2013.05.002

11. Ramani RS, Kalra DD. Assessment of knowledge, attitude and practice of dentists regarding cone beam computed tomography in Mumbai and Navi Mumbai: a cross sectional study. Eur J Biomed Pharm Sci. 2016;3(10):480–485.

12. Ramakrishnan P, Shafi FM, Subhash A, Kumara A, Chakkarayan J, Vengalath J. A survey on radiographic prescription practices in dental implant assessment among dentists in Kerala, India. Oral Health Dent Manag. 2014;13(826):30.

13. Parashar V, Whaites E, Monsour P, Chaudhry J, Geist JR. Cone beam computed tomography in dental education: a survey of US, UK, and Australian dental schools. J Dent Educ. 2012;76:1443–1447. doi:10.1002/j.0022-0337.2012.76.11.tb05405.x

14. Rugani P, Kirnbauer B, Arnetzl GV, Jakse N. Cone beam computerized tomography: basics for digital planning in oral surgery and implantology. Int J Comput Dent. 2009;12:131–145.

15. Hatcher DC. Operational principles for cone-beam computed tomography. J Am Dent Assoc. 2010;141(Suppl 3):3S–6S. doi:10.14219/jada.archive.2010.0359

16. Venkatesh N, Shetty M, John N. Preservation of peri-implant papilla: a narrative review. J Health Allied SciNU. 2023;13:11–18. doi:10.1055/s-0042-1748491

17. Dölekoglu S, Fisekçioglu E, Ilgüy M, Ilgüy D. The usage of digital radiography and cone beam computed tomography among Turkish dentists. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2011;40(379):84. doi:10.1259/dmfr/27837552

18. Adibi S, Zhang W, Servos T, O’Neill PN. Cone beam computed tomography in dentistry: what dental educators and learners should know. J Dent Educ. 2012;76(1437):42. doi:10.1002/j.0022-0337.2012.76.11.tb05404.x

19. Geleijns J, Broerse JJ. Radiation risks in dental and medical radiography. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 1995;102:484–487.

20. Lillesand T, Kiefer RW, Chipman J. Remote Sensing and Image Interpretation. John Wiley & Sons; 2014.

21. Shetty S, Castelino R, Babu S, Prasanna LA, Roopashri K. Knowledge and attitude of dentists towards cone beam computed tomography in Mangalore–a questionnaire survey. Austin J Radiol. 2015;2:1016.

22. Aditya A, Lele S, Aditya P. Current status of knowledge, attitude, and perspective of dental practitioners toward cone beam computed tomography: a survey. Oral Maxillofacial Radiol. 2015;3:54. doi:10.4103/2321-3841.157524

23. Miracle AC, Mukherji SK. Conebeam CT of the head and neck, part 2: clinical applications. Am J Neuroradiol. 2009;30:1285–1292. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1654

24. Shah N, Bansal N, Logani A. Recent advances in imaging technologies in dentistry.World. J Radiol. 2014;6(10):794–807.

25. Bianchi SD, Lojacono A. 2d and 3D images generated by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for dentomaxillofacial investigations. In: Lembke H, Vannier M, Inamuson K Forman A, editors. CARS computer assisted radiology and surgery. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1998:792–797.

26. Ali ABMR, Khanam K, Keerthi GK, Mathew A, Sharief SNH. CBCT- A boon for implant dentistry. Saudi J Oral Dent Res. 2019;4(10):691–699. doi:10.1016/j.sjodr.2019.10.003

27. Hussaini S, Glogauer M, Sheikh Z, Al-Waeli H. CBCT in dental implantology: a key tool for preventing peri-implantitis and enhancing patient outcomes. Dent J. 2024;12(7):196–204. doi:10.3390/dj12070296

28. Hartshorne J. Essential guidelines for using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) in implant dentistry. Modern Dent Media. 2018. doi:10.1016/j.moddent.2018.05.002

29. Lafferty J. Considering CBCT. Dent Prot. 2019. doi:10.1016/j.dentprot.2019.04.001

30. Tyndall DA, Price JB, Tetradis S, et al. Position statement of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology on selection criteria for the use of radiology in dental implantology with emphasis on cone beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;113(6):817–826. doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2012.02.015

31. Saha N, Nair V. Role of CBCT in dental implant treatment plan: a review. J Med Health Res. 2023;8(2):1–5. doi:10.56557/JOMAHR/2023/v8i28216

32. Shankar MS, Pal B, Rai N, Patil DP. CBCT as an emerging gold standard for presurgical planning in implant restorations. J Indian Acad Oral Med Radiol. 2013;25(1):66–70. doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10011-1344

33. Resnik R. Use of cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry. Implant Dent. 2012;21:78–86. doi:10.1097/ID.0000000000000002

34. Ludlow JB, Davies-Ludlow L, Brooks S, Howerton W. Dosimetry of 3 CBCT devices for oral and maxillofacial radiology: CB Mercuray, NewTom 3G and i-CAT. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol. 2006;35(4):219–226. doi:10.1259/dmfr/14340323

35. Chau AC, Fung K. Comparison of radiation dose for implant imaging using conventional spiral tomography, computed tomography, and cone-beam computed tomography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2009;107(4):559–565. doi:10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.11.009

36. Liu W, Zhu F, Samal A, Wang HL. Suggested mesiodistal distance for multiple implant placement based on the natural tooth crown dimension with digital design. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2022;24(6):801–808. PMID; PMC10087941. doi:10.1111/cid.13135

37. Kamburoğlu K, Kurşun Ş, Akarslan Z. Dental students’ knowledge and attitudes towards cone beam computed tomography in Turkey. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol. 2011;40(7):439–443. doi:10.1259/dmfr/21915689

Continue Reading

August 11, 2025

Japan boxing to hold emergency meeting following fighters’ deaths | Boxing News

Boxers Shigetoshi Kotari and Hiromasa Urakawa died following fights on the same card in Tokyo last week.

Japanese boxing officials will hold an emergency meeting on Tuesday as the sport in the country faces intense scrutiny following the deaths of two fighters in separate bouts at the same event.

Super featherweight Shigetoshi Kotari and lightweight Hiromasa Urakawa, both 28, fought on the same card at Tokyo’s Korakuen Hall on August 2 and died days later following brain surgery.

The Japan Boxing Commission (JBC), gym owners and other boxing officials are under pressure to act and will hold an emergency meeting on Tuesday.

They are also expected to have talks about safety next month, local media said.

“We are acutely aware of our responsibility as the manager of the sport,” Tsuyoshi Yasukochi, secretary-general of the JBC, told reporters on Sunday.

“We will take whatever measures we can.”

Japanese media highlighted the risks of fighters dehydrating to lose weight rapidly before weigh-ins.

“Dehydration makes the brain more susceptible to bleeding,” the Asahi Shimbun newspaper said.

That is one of the issues the JBC plans to discuss with trainers.

“They want to hear from gym officials who work closely with the athletes about such items as weight loss methods and pre-bout conditioning, which may be causally related (to deaths),” the Nikkan Sports newspaper said.

In one immediate measure, the commission has decided to reduce all Oriental and Pacific Boxing Federation title bouts to 10 rounds from 12.

“The offensive power of Japanese boxing today is tremendous,” Yasukochi was quoted by the Asahi Shimbun as telling reporters.

“We have more and more boxers who are able to start exchanges of fierce blows from the first round. Maybe 12 rounds can be dangerous.”

Continue Reading

August 11, 2025

Blog

Introduction

Materials And Methods

Inclusion Criteria

Exclusion Criteria

Patients Who Refused to Give Fingertip Blood

Smoking Status

Statistical Analysis

Results

Discussion

Disclosure

References

McLaren

Ferrari

Mercedes

Red Bull

Williams

Aston Martin

Kick Sauber

Racing Bulls

Haas

Alpine

Cadillac

BJP-linked group holds boycott rallies

Asia Cup 2025 will begin on 9th September.

Why the Asia Cup 2025 will be played in T20I format

Asia Cup winners

When will Asia Cup 2025 begin?

Which team has won the Asia Cup the most times?

A comet or an alien probe?

What makes Atlas an unusual comet?

Potato consumption and T2D risks

About the study

Study findings

Conclusions

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Study Design

Participant Recruitment

Survey Development

Data Collection Procedure

Ethical Considerations

Data Management and Statistical Analysis

Timeline of the Study

Importance of the Study

Results

Distribution of Respondents by Occupation

Preferred Radiographic Methods for Single Implant Therapy

Preferred Radiographic Methods for Multiple Implants Therapy

Correlation Between Occupation and Radiographic Practices

Radiographic Practices During Implant Placement

Implant Biological Considerations Knowledge

Discussion

Conclusion

Disclosure

References