In situ and in vitro comparison of laser fluorescence with visual inspection in detecting occlusal caries lesions

The aim of this study was to compare the in situ and in vitro performances of a laser fluorescence (LF) device (DIAGNOdent 2095) with visual inspection for the detection of occlusal caries in permanent teeth. Sixty-four sites were selected, and visual inspection and LF assessments were carried out, in vitro, three times by two independent examiners, with a 1-week interval between evaluations. Afterwards, the occlusal surfaces were mounted on the palatal portion of removable acrylic orthodontic appliances and placed in six volunteers. Assessments were repeated and validated by histological analysis of the tooth sections under a stereomicroscope. For both examiners, the highest intra-examiner values were observed for the visual inspection when in vitro and in situ evaluations were compared. The inter-examiner reproducibility varied from 0.61 to 0.64, except for the in vitro assessment using LF, which presented a lower value (0.43). The methods showed high specificity at the D(1) threshold (considering enamel and dentin caries as disease). In vitro evaluations showed the highest values of sensitivity for both methods when compared to the in situ evaluations at D(1) and D(2) (considering only dentinal caries as the disease) thresholds. For both methods, the results of sensitivity (at D(1) and D(2)) and accuracy (at D(1)) showed significant differences between in vitro and in situ conditions. However, the sensitivity (at D(1) and D(2)), specificity and accuracy (both at D(1)) of the methods were not significantly different when the same condition was considered. It can be concluded that visual inspection and LF showed better performance in vitro than in situ.

BPA qualtitative and quantitative assessment associated with orthodontic bonding in vivo

OBJECTIVE To assess the in vivo amount of BPA released from a visible light-cured orthodontic adhesive, immediately after bracket bonding. METHODS 20 orthodontic patients were recruited after obtaining informed consent. All patients received 24 orthodontic brackets in both dental arches. In Group A (11 patients), 25 ml of tap water were used for mouth rinsing, whereas in Group B (9 patients) a simulated mouth rinse formulation was used: a mixture of 20 ml de-ionized water plus 5 ml absolute ethanol. Rinsing solutions were collected before, immediately after placing the orthodontic appliances and after washing out the oral cavity and were then stored in glass tubes. Rinsing was performed in a single phase for 60s with the entire volume of each liquid. The BPA analysis was performed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. RESULTS An increase in BPA concentration immediately after the 1st post-bonding rinse was observed, for both rinsing media, which was reduced after the 2nd post-bonding rinse. Water exhibited higher levels of BPA concentration than water/ethanol after 1st and 2nd post-bonding rinses. Two-way mixed Repeated Measures ANOVA showed that the primary null hypothesis declaring mean BPA concentration to be equal across rinsing medium and rinsing status was rejected (p-value <0.001). The main effects of the rinsing medium and status, as well as their interaction were found to be statistically significant (p-values 0.048, <0.001 and 0.011 respectively). SIGNIFICANCE A significant pattern of increase of BPA concentration, followed by a decrease that reached the initial values was observed. The amount of BPA was relatively low and far below the reference limits of tolerable daily intake.

Influence of unilateral maxillary first molar extraction treatment on second and third molar inclination in Class II subdivision patients.

OBJECTIVE To assess the maxillary second molar (M2) and third molar (M3) inclination following orthodontic treatment of Class II subdivision malocclusion with unilateral maxillary first molar (M1) extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS Panoramic radiographs of 21 Class II subdivision adolescents (eight boys, 13 girls; mean age, 12.8 years; standard deviation, 1.7 years) before treatment, after treatment with extraction of one maxillary first molar and Begg appliances and after at least 1.8 years in retention were retrospectively collected from a private practice. M2 and M3 inclination angles (M2/ITP, M2/IOP, M3/ITP, M3/IOP), constructed by intertuberosity (ITP) and interorbital planes (IOP), were calculated for the extracted and nonextracted segments. Random effects regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect on the molar angulation of extraction, time, and gender after adjusting for baseline measurements. RESULTS Time and extraction status were significant predictors for M2 angulation. M2/ITP and M2/IOP decreased by 4.04 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.93, 1.16; P  =  .001) and 3.67 (95% CI: -6.76, -0.58; P  =  .020) in the extraction group compared to the nonextraction group after adjusting for time and gender. The adjusted analysis showed that extraction was the only predictor for M3 angulation that reached statistical significance. M3 mesial inclination increased by 7.38° (95% CI: -11.2, -3.54; P < .001) and 7.33° (95% CI: -11.48, -3.19; P  =  .001). CONCLUSIONS M2 and M3 uprighting significantly improved in the extraction side after orthodontic treatment with unilateral maxillary M1 extraction. There was a significant increase in mesial tipping of maxillary second molar crowns over time.

Objective assessment of patient compliance with removable orthodontic appliances: a cross-sectional cohort study.

OBJECTIVE To assess objectively patient compliance with removable orthodontic appliances and the effect of possible influential factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS Wearing times of 45 White patients were recorded with the aid of the TheraMon microsensor. Patient compliance was assessed relative to wear prescription and other parameters, such as age and sex. RESULTS There was high individual variation in most measured variables and in all groups/subgroups. During a median observation period of 186 days (range, 55-318 days) the actual wear time was 9.0 h/d (range, 0.0-16.0 h/d) and did not differ between distinct prescriptions (P = .49). Eight patients wore their appliances less than 2 h/d, and six of them did not wear their appliances at all. Overall, the median wear per day relative to prescription was 62.5% (range, 0.0-89.3%) for the 14 h/d and 112.5% (range, 0.0-200.0%) for the 8 h/d prescription wear (P = .01) groups. There was a strong negative correlation of age (median: 12.5 years) with the daily percentage of actual wear time per day relative to wear prescription (14 h/d prescription: n = 21, rho = -0.61, P = .00; 8 h/d prescription: n = 24, rho = -0.73, P = .00), while sex did not exert a significant influence on compliance (P = .58). CONCLUSIONS Despite the fact that patients and parents were informed about wear time recording, compliance was insufficient with regard to functional treatment (14 h/d prescription), while it was sufficient for retention purposes (8 h/d prescription). Objective measures are necessary to assess compliance with removable orthodontic appliances since patient compliance is a highly variable issue.