Search

Objectives: This cross-sectional school-based study explored the influence of malocclusion on temporomandibular disorders (TMD) pain complaints, and whether this association would be mediated by sleep bruxism in a representative sample of 7- to 8-year-old children. Methods: Path analysis estimated direct, indirect, and total effects of occlusal features on sleep bruxism and TMD pain in 7- to 8-year-old children. Occlusal features were assessed with Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI), orofacial pain complaints using the TMD pain screener, possible sleep bruxism based on self-reports, and probable sleep bruxism based on self-reports combined with clinical findings. Structural equation modeling analyzed data with confounding factors. Results: From 580 participants, possible sleep bruxism was observed in 136 children (31.5%), probable sleep bruxism in 30 children (6.7%), and TMD pain complaints in 78 children (13.8%). Malocclusion had no direct effect on either possible sleep bruxism [standardized coefficient (SC) 0.000; p = 0.992], or TMD pain complaints (SC – 0.01; p = 0.740). When probable sleep bruxism was set as the mediator of interest, malocclusion did not directly affect probable sleep bruxism (SC 0.01; p = 0.766), nor TMD pain complaints (SC – 0.02; p = 0.515). A direct effect of probable sleep bruxism on TMD pain complaints was observed with an SC of 0.60 (p < 0.001). However, in neither case, malocclusion indirectly affected TMD pain complaints via bruxism. Conclusion: Malocclusion in 7- to 8-year-old children did not directly influence possible or probable sleep bruxism or TMD pain complaints. Instead, probable sleep bruxism was strongly associated with TMD pain complaints. Clinical significance: The impact of occlusal features on TMD pain complaints and bruxism has been a long-standing controversy in dentistry. However, the scientific literature linking this association may be inconsistent, mainly due to biased sample selection methods with inadequate consideration of confounders. Further research should try to identify additional risk factors for TMD pain in addition to probable sleep bruxism in children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate glycemic levels in diabetic patients before, during, and after extractions using 2% lidocaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (Lido/Epi) and 3% prilocaine with 0.03 IU/mL felypressin (Prilo/Fely). Materials and methods: A double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted to evaluate changes in body parameters and glycemic levels in diabetic patients undergoing two anesthetic protocols during dental extractions. During surgery, we evaluated blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), saturation (SpO2), and capillary glycemic levels (Gly). These parameters were measured at the following surgical moments: basal, 30 min after medication, incision, tooth removal, suture, and 30 and 60 min after anesthesia. Results: Data analysis showed no differences between the groups considering age, weight, and time spent in surgery. Increased systolic BP and decreased diastolic BP were observed in the lido/epi group. No difference was observed in the prilo/fely group among the surgical moments or between the groups regarding BP. No difference was observed in HR and SpO2 between the groups at any surgical moment. However, differences were found when compared the differences in glycemic and basal levels in both groups with greater decreases in blood glucose values for the lido/epi group. In anxiety level evaluation, there was no difference between the different surgical moments. Conclusion: Thus, both lido/epi and prilo/fely (maximum 3.6 mL) can be safely used in controlled diabetic patients Clinical relevance: The use of lidocaine associated with epinephrine did not increase glycemic levels but leads to decrease over time when associated with an anxiety reduction protocol, offering some advantage over prilocaine plus felypressin for diabetic patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study evaluated the influence of endodontic sealers with different chemical compositions on bond strength of resin cement/glass fiber post junction to root dentin. Materials and methods: Seventy-two maxillary canines roots were instrumented with Reciproc (#R50) and distributed in 6 groups (n = 12) according to endodontic sealers: G1—control (no sealer); G2—Endofill; G3—Sealapex; G4—AH Plus; G5—Sealer Plus; G6—EndoSequence BC. The glass fiber post was cemented with Panavia F in 10 of the specimens. Two specimens from each group did not receive post and were analyzed by SEM to verify presence of filling material. Three slices were obtained from each third. The first slice was subjected to push-out test and type of failure. The second slice was imaged using laser confocal microscopy for evaluation of dentin/resin cement adhesive interface. Bond strength (BS) data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc tests; for LCM data, we used Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn's tests. Results: Endofill yielded the lowest BS values (p < 0.05). The control and AH Plus groups differed from all others (p < 0.05). In all groups, adhesive to dentin failure predominated. Most specimens of control and AH Plus groups had acceptable interfaces, while those of EndoSequence BC, Sealapex, and Sealer Plus groups ranged between acceptable and poor interfaces. Overall, few filling material remnants were observed on the dentin. Conclusion: EndoSequence BC, Sealapex, Sealer Plus, and Endofill negatively interfere with BS of glass fiber post/resin cement junction to root dentin. Clinical relevance: In cases whose restoration planning includes a post cemented with resin cement, it is recommended that endodontic sealer be based on epoxy resin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]