Search

Aim: In this study, ultrastructural, chemical, and histological analyses of extracted deciduous teeth were performed to analyze the effect of two different types of glass ionomer cements used in association with selective caries removal in deep lesions of deciduous teeth. Methods: A clinical, ex vivo, longitudinal study was conducted. A total of 19 deciduous molars from 9 volunteer patients were used. The teeth were randomly restored with one of two types of glass ionomer cement following the selective caries removal technique. The groups were divided into a control group, which used Fuji IX (GC- Europe, Leuven, Belgium), and a test group, which used Maxxion R (FGM- Joinville, Santa Catarina, Brazil). After exfoliation, the teeth were stored at 4°C and subjected to scanning electron microscopy (SEM), optical microscopy (OM), and energy dispersive spectrometry (EDS). Results: EDS analysis revealed that calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) were present in 100% of the specimens in both the control and test groups. Fluoride was found in 60% of the control group specimens and 63% of the test group specimens. OM images showed areas of mineralized dentin in both treatment groups. Conclusions: Selective caries removal for deep lesions in deciduous teeth was shown to be a safe therapeutic protocol, demonstrating signs of dentin mineralization and control of disease progression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of chemical and microbiological methods of caries induction on microtensile bond strength (μTBS) of current adhesive systems to primary dentin. Materials and Methods: Flat dentin surfaces from 36 primary molars were assigned to 3 groups according to the method of inducing caries-affected dentin: (1) control (sound dentin); (2) pH cycling; and (3) microbiological. In both methods, teeth were submitted to caries induction for 14 days, and the sound dentin was stored in distilled water for the same period. Specimens were then randomly reassigned according to adhesive system: a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Adper Single Bond 2) or a two-step self-etching system (Clearfil SE Bond). Composite buildups were constructed and the teeth were sectioned to obtain bonded sticks (0.8 mm²) to be tested for microtensile bond strength. The μTBS means were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's tests (α = 0.05). Failure mode was evaluated using a stereomicroscope (400X). Results: Both methods of caries induction resulted in lower μTBS values (with no significant difference between them) than those obtained for sound dentin. Adhesive systems showed similar bond strength values. The percentage of premature failure was higher in the microbiological group, regardless of adhesive system. Conclusion: Microbiological and pH-cycling methods are both suitable for simulating caries-affected dentin for bonding evaluations in primary teeth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the knowledge of Pediatric Dentists in the city of Fortaleza-CE about the practice of sedation. Methods: Participated 66 professional's specialists registered in the Regional Council of Dentistry - Ceara who worked in public and private service. Data collection was performed through a structured and self-administered questionnaire. The data obtained were tabulated in the IBM SPSS Statistics program and analyzed through a descriptive and exploratory statistical analysis. Results: The results showed that 36.4% of the professionals had 5 to 10 years of specialization, 93.9% were female and 59.1% both worked in the public and private sectors. Only 21.1% had a sedation course and 33.3% used the technique. Midazolam and Cloral Hydrate were the most commonly cited drugs in the sedation technique. Allergic reactions were the most reported as risk of sedation. Conclusion: Considering the limitations of this study, it is possible to consider that the professionals have reasonable knowledge and few use the technique of sedation, mainly because they do not feel safe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of RGO: Revista Gaúcha de Odontologia is the property of RGO: Revista Gaucha de Odontologia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background. Fluoride released from glass ionomer cements (GICs) is capable of preventing caries lesions. However, the preventive effect in margins of occlusal and occlusoproximal restorations have not been proved. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of GIC to prevent caries lesions in margins of occlusal and occlusoproximal restorations in primary teeth compared with that of other restorative materials. Types of Studies Reviewed. The authors conducted a literature search in PubMed and MEDLINE to verify the clinical trials available on the outcome of caries lesions. The inclusion criteria were that the subject related to the scope of this systematic review, the study had a follow-up, and the study was not performed in specific groups. The authors performed all meta-analyses by considering the secondary caries rates for the restorations in clinical trials. Results. The search strategy identified 450 potentially relevant studies, and the authors included 8 of them in the review. The main reasons for exclusion were that the studies were not related to the scope of this review or were not longitudinal trials. The secondary caries rate of the occlusal restorations was not different among the restorative materials (odds ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.5-3.1). For occlusoproximal analysis, GIC was associated significantly with better ability to prevent caries lesions (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-2.5). Conclusions and Practical Implications. Because new caries lesions in the margins of restorations are the main reason for failure and replacement of restorations in primary teeth, it is important to know whether there is a benefit in using GICs in both occlusal and occlusoproximal cavities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]