Search

The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effects of a single dose application of two daily toothpastes on enamel exposed to acid attack. The research was conducted on human molars enamel fragments (n = 72). The two different toothpastes active ingredients were sodium fluoride (NaF) and stannous fluoride (SnF2). They were compared in protecting the surface of the enamel exposed to three acids: citric acid, lactic acid and hydrochloric acid. A spectrophotometer was used to measure the calcium ions and phosphate released in the solutions by the enamel specimens. Afterward, ionic concentrations were analyzed through the t-Student test, in order to estimate the significance level (p &lt, 0.05) of the solubility differences obtained between the treatment and control groups. Finally, sample surfaces were analyzed with scanning electron microscopy and X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (SEM/EDX). The two analyzed toothpastes did not reveal any statistically significant variation in the release of calcium and phosphate (p &gt, 0.05). Nevertheless, acid-resistant deposits were detected in samples treated with stannous fluoride and exposed to lactic acid, though the presence of tin ion deposits on samples treated with stannous fluoride was not shown. A single dose of a fluoride-based toothpaste before different acids attack, in simulated oral cavity conditions, did not show a significant preventive effect.

Distraction osteogenesis (DO) is a technique that allows the generation of new bone in a gap between 2 vascularized bone surfaces in response to the application of graduated tensile stress across the bone gap.Distraction osteogenesis has become a routine treatment of choice to correct skeletal deformities and severe bone defects in the craniofacial complex over the past decade. Distraction osteogenesis has been successfully chosen in lengthening the maxilla and the mandible; in the maxilla and recently in the mandible, the jawbones have been distracted and widened transversely to relieve severe anterior dental crowding and transverse discrepancies between the dental arches.Distraction osteogenesis for maxillary advancement started in 1993 and is now widely used, especially in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion caused by maxillary hypoplasia.The aim of this study was to present the efficiency of combined orthodontic and DO in the severe maxillary hypoplasia.A 35-year-old Italian man presented to our clinical practice with the chief complaint of esthetic and functionally problems because of skeletal Class III malocclusion with anterior crossbite.Considering that the severity of the skeletal discrepancy is remarkable but compensated by the DO potential, the combined orthodontic and DO treatment was considered adequate, like less invasive and equally effective.It was obtained a good alignment with the upper and lower arch dental alveolar maxillary advancement that allowed to correct the sagittal relationships.The patient was satisfied for the treatment results and had considerable improvement in his self-esteem.

Minimally invasive facial rejuvenation procedures reached an all-time high in the 2016. This reveals a growing interest in a smoother, younger, and tighter look accessible using the esthetic medicine tools like botulinum toxin and dermal filler injections, laser, and microdermabrasion. Forty-five patients from 35 to 52 years old (medium age 43.8), 38 women and 7 men underwent 5 sessions of Fraxel laser, 1 session of very low G prime HA, and Microbotox injection treatments from January 2016 and January 2017, were included in this study. In this study, we demonstrated that the usage of three treatments together, like mBTX, Volite, and Fractional laser, have a better result despite every single technique alone. The clinical result showed 98% (44 patients, 6 males, 38 females) of the patients had a smoother skin surface, brighter, more hydrated, and elastic skin; 68% of our patients (31 patients, 5 males, 26 females) showed less skin defects and staining as well as less small wrinkles, thanks to Fraxel laser treatment; 98% (44 patients, 6 males, 38 females) showed tighter skin with less sebaceous gland secretion. The aim of this study was to demonstrate that the combination of three techniques acts better and faster than single treatment to contrast facial aging and to improve skin texture and quality.

BACKGROUND Orthodontic therapy is used to solve numerous oral problems, but the use of fixed oral devices can also impact negatively the oral cavity, if the treatment is not steadily under control. The aim of this study is to evaluate tooth, bone and soft tissues lesions due to the presence of fixed orthodontic appliances. METHODS One hundred patients with fixed orthodontic appliances were included in the study. In particular, 20 patients with rapid palatal expander (RPE), 20 patients with Forsus appliance, 20 patients with a fixed multibracket appliance treatment, 20 patients with just the lower vestibular multibracket treatment and 20 patients with both upper and lower vestibular multibracket treatment. An accurate oral examination of the oral cavity, comprehending teeth, bone and soft tissues, was carried out thoroughly, in order to find possible lesions caused by the fixed orthodontic treatment. RESULTS Concerning RPE, 35% patients had reversible palatal lesions, while 45% patients had the impression of the appliance on the tongue. Periodontal damages were observed in 5% of the patients, as well as tooth lesions (i.e. dental caries). 20% of the patients with Forsus appliance experienced the lesion on the cheek mucosa, while 10% individuals reported periodontal problems, and 15% of the subject suffered for WSL (white spot lesion) and dental caries. Upper vestibular multibracket appliance caused superior labial lesions (15%), cheek mucosal lesions (20%), gingivitis (55%), white spot lesions (WSL) of superior teeth (15%), while dental recessions and periodontitis due to the appliance were rarely observed (5%). Lower vestibular multibracket appliance was frequently the cause of inferior labial lesions (15%), cheek mucosal lesions (15%), gingivitis (50%), WSL of inferior teeth (20%) and also in lower arch dental recessions and periodontitis due to the appliance were rarely observed (5%). Patients with both superior and inferior multibracket appliance experienced upper and/or lower lip lesions (25%), lesions of cheek mucosa (25%), gingivitis (65%) and WSL (30%), and just in few cases periodontitis (10%). Data shows a more critical oral situation in patients with both superior and inferior appliances than people with one-arch therapy. CONCLUSIONS Orthodontic therapy offers a considerable number of advantages, but it is important to underline what may be the adverse consequences also. This allows the orthodontist to inform the patient of all the possible effects of their therapeutic choice. In most cases, RPE can cause an impression of the device on the tongue and reversible lesions of the palate. On the other hand, the orthodontic fixed therapy can cause gingivitis, followed by mucosal lesions, labial lesions and WSL. For these reasons, an accurate assessment of the patients before the application of fixed orthodontic treatment is necessary. Oral hygiene instructions and motivation are very important, as well as periodic controls of the fixed oral device.

Background: Oral microbiota has been at the center of cultural attention in recent years. In daily clinical practice, orthodontic appliances may be associated with an increased cariogenic risk and a worsening of preexisting periodontal diseases. Objective: The purpose of this review is to investigate the available evidence regarding the association between orthodontic appliances and changes in the quality and quantity of the oral microbiota. Design: The research included every article published up to October 2017 featuring the keywords ‘Orthodontic appliance* AND (microbiological colonization OR periodontal pathogen* OR Streptococcus mutans OR Lactobacillus spp. OR Candida OR Tannerella forsythia OR Treponema denticola OR Fusobacterium nucleatum OR Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans OR Prevotella intermedia OR Prevotella nigrescens OR Porphyromonas gingivalis)’ and was conducted in the major medical databases. The methodological quality of selected papers was scored using the ‘Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care Criteria for Grading Assessed Studies’ (SBU) method. Results: Orthodontic appliances influence the oral microbiota with an increase in the counts of S. mutans and Lactobacillus spp. and in the percentage of potentially pathogenic gram-negative bacteria. Conclusions: There is moderate/high evidence regarding the association between orthodontic appliances and changes in the oral microbiota. PROSPERO registration number CRD42018091589.