2,3-Dichloro-1,4-hydroquinone 2,3-dichloro-1,4-benzoquinone monohydrate: a quinhydrone-type 1:1 donor-acceptor [D-A] charge-transfer complex

In the crystal structure of the title compound (systematic name: 2,3-dichlorobenzene-1,4-diol 2,3-dichlorocyclohexa-2,5-diene-1,4-dione monohydrate), C(6)H(4)Cl(2)O(2)center dot C(6)H(2)Cl(2)O(2)center dot H(2)O, the 2,3-dichloro-1,4-hydroquinone donor (D) and the 2,3-dichloro-1,4-benzoquinone acceptor (A) molecules form alternating stacks along [100]. Their molecular planes [maximum deviations for non-H atoms: 0.0133 (14) (D) and 0.0763 (14) angstrom (A)] are inclined to one another by 1.45 (3)degrees and are thus almost parallel. There are pi-pi interactions involving the D and A molecules, with centroid-centroid distances of 3.5043 (9) and 3.9548 (9) angstrom. Intermolecular O-H center dot center dot center dot O hydrogen bonds involving the water molecule and the hydroxy and ketone groups lead to the formation of two-dimensional networks lying parallel to (001). These networks are linked by C-H center dot center dot center dot O interactions, forming a three-dimensional structure.

Survival of bonded lingual retainers with chemical or photo polymerization over a 2-year period: a single-center, randomized controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION The objective of this trial was to compare the survival rates of mandibular lingual retainers bonded with either chemically cured or light-cured adhesive after orthodontic treatment. METHODS Patients having undergone orthodontic treatment at a private orthodontic office were randomly allocated to fixed retainers placed with chemically cured composite or light-cured composite. Eligibility criteria included no active caries, restorations, or fractures on the mandibular anterior teeth, and adequate oral hygiene. The main outcome was any type of first-time lingual retainer breakage; pattern of failure (adapted adhesive remnant index scores) was a secondary outcome. Randomization was accomplished with random permuted blocks of 20 patients with allocation concealed in sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. Blinding was applicable for outcome assessment only. Patients were reviewed at 1, 3, and 6 months and then every 6 months after placement of the retainer until completion of the study. Data were analyzed using survival analysis including Cox regression; sensitivity analysis was carried out after data imputation for subjects lost to follow-up. RESULTS Two hundred twenty patients (median age, 16 years; interquartile range, 2; range, 12-47 years) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either chemical or light curing. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, the median follow-up period was 2.19 years (range, 0.003-3.64 years), and 16 patients were lost to follow-up. At a minimum follow-up of 2 years, 47 of 110 (42.7%) and 55 of 110 (50.0%) retainers had some type of failure with chemically cured and light-cured adhesive, respectively (log-rank test, P = 0.35). Data were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis, and the hazard ratio (HR) was 1.15 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.70; P = 0.47). There was weak evidence that age is a significant predictor for lingual retainer failures (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93-1.00; P = 0.08). Adhesive remnant index scoring was possible for only 66 of the 102 (64.7%) failures and did not differ between composites (Fisher exact test, P = 0.16). No serious harm was observed other than gingivitis associated with plaque accumulation. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study indicated no evidence that survival of mandibular lingual retainers differs between chemically and light-cured adhesives. The overall failure rate was 46.4%; however, this included any type of failure, which may have exaggerated the overall failure rate.

Poly(ethylene oxide)-b-poly(3-sulfopropyl methacrylate) block copolymers for calcium phosphate mineralization and biofilm inhibition.

Poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) has long been used as an additive in toothpaste, partly because it reduces biofilm formation on teeth. It does not, however, reduce the formation of dental calculus or support the remineralization of dental enamel or dentine. The present article describes the synthesis of new block copolymers on the basis of PEO and poly(3-sulfopropyl methacrylate) blocks using atom transfer radical polymerization. The polymers have very large molecular weights (over 10(6) g/mol) and are highly water-soluble. They delay the precipitation of calcium phosphate from aqueous solution but, upon precipitation, lead to relatively monodisperse hydroxyapatite (HAP) spheres. Moreover, the polymers inhibit the bacterial colonization of human enamel by Streptococcus gordonii, a pioneer bacterium in oral biofilm formation, in vitro. The formation of well-defined HAP spheres suggests that a polymer-induced liquid precursor phase could be involved in the precipitation process. Moreover, the inhibition of bacterial adhesion suggests that the polymers could be utilized in caries prevention.