Search

Semen hyperviscosity (SHV) is one of the factors involved in deficiency in sperm function. This research aimed to evaluate seminal plasma total antioxidant capacity (TAC) and malondialdehyde (MDA) levels in infertile patients with hyperviscous and non-hyperviscous semen samples to understand whether hyperviscous semen is associated with oxidative damage in infertile subjects. In this cross sectional study, 59 semen samples were provided by fertile (n=12) individuals as control, infertile patients with normal viscosity (n=25) and infertile patients with hyperviscosity (n=22). After semen parameters examination, semen viscosity was studied by glass pipettes. Seminal plasma TAC and MDA levels were measured by ferric reducing of antioxidant power (FRAP) and thiobarbituric acid reaction (TBAR) methods, respectively. A probability less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant throughout the article. The mean of sperm parameters including: counts, motility and normal morphology in patients with hyperviscosity were significantly lower than those in non-hyperviscosity patients (p<0.05, p<0.01 and p<0.001, respectively). The mean of seminal plasma TAC value in seminal plasma of non-hyperviscosity patients (1710.31 ± 458.67 µmol/l) was significantly (p<0.01) higher than that of hyperviscosity group (1230.25 ± 352 µmol/l). A trend toward a higher mean of seminal plasma MDA value was estimated for hyperviscous group compared with non-hyperviscous (1.01 ± 0.41 nmol/ml vs. 0.94 ± 0.28 nmol/l); however, it was nonsignificant. Hyperviscous semen impairs seminal plasma TAC which is eventually associated with sperm membrane lipid peroxidation.

Background and Aims: Effect of surface treatments on repair bond strength of aged composite resins might be different due to their dissimilar fillers. The aim was to evaluate the effect of different surface treatments on repair micro-shear bond strength (µSBS) of silica- (Spectrum TPH) and zirconia-filled (Filtek Z250) composite resins., Materials and Methods: Twenty-seven composite resin blocks were made from each type of composite resin: Z250 and Spectrum TPH. After aging, blocks of each type were randomly divided into three groups according to surface treatments: alloy primer, silane, and only surface roughening. Subsequently, each group was further subdivided into 3 subgroups based on the adhesive system used: Single Bond, Clearfil SE Bond, and Margin Bond. Four composite resin columns were added on each block. After thermocycling, µSBStest were done at cross head speed of 0.5 mm/min. Data was analysed using multifactor ANOVA, one-way ANOVA and a post-hoc Bonferroni tests (α = 0.05)., Results: Analysis of data showed that the effect of composite resin type was not significant (p > 0.05), but the effects of the type of surface treatment (p = 0.01) and the type of adhesive system (p = 0.01) were significant on repair µSBS. In addition, the cumulative effect of the composite type-surface treatment and the composite type with the type of adhesive system were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). However, the cumulative effects of the adhesive system-surface treatment (p = 0.03) and the composite type-the adhesive system-surface treatments (p = 0.002) were significant., Conclusion: Although repair µSBS values of both silica- and zirconia-filled composite resins were similar, use of different combinations of surface treatments and adhesive systems affected their repair µSBS differently.

Background and Aims: The present study evaluated the most common reasons for replacing amalgam restorations in a university clinic., Materials and Methods: A total of 217 restorations which needed to be replaced were clinically and radiographically evaluated in a period of 4 months. The frequencies of reasons for replacing amalgam restorations were calculated: The assessed items included recurrent caries, tooth structure fracture (functional or non-functional cusps), amalgam bulk fracture, amalgam marginal fracture, proximal overhangs, and esthetics. Data were analyzed using Fischer's exact test., Results: Both in vital teeth and teeth which had undergone root canal therapy, the most common reason for amalgam replacement was cusp fracture, with the fracture of non-functional cusps being statistically significant. Recurrent caries was the second most common reason for amalgam replacement. In Class I restorations, the most common reasons were recurrent caries and esthetics, with no statistical significance. The most frequent problem in Class II restorations was fracture of non-functional cusps, with a statistical significance in three-surface restorations., Conclusion: According to the results, failing to reduce undermined cusps and neglectful caries removal are the reasons for majority of amalgam restoration replacements. These issues should be emphasized in the curriculum for dental students and continuing education courses.