Bupivacaine 0.25% and methylene blue spread with epidural anesthesia in dog

Objective To evaluate the extent sensory and motor blocks produced by the epidural injection of different volumes of 0.25% bupivacaine (Bu) with methylene blue (MB), in dogs. Study design Prospective experimental trial. Animals Twenty healthy adult mongrel dogs, weighing 9.9 +/- 1.9 kg. Methods Dogs were randomly allocated into one of four groups that received 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 or 0.8 mL kg-1 of an epidural solution containing 0.25% Bu and MB. Sensory block was evaluated against time by pinching the tail, hind limb interdigital web, toenail bases and the skin over the vertebral dermatomes. Motor block was assessed by ataxia, hind limb weight-bearing ability and by loss of muscle tone of the tail and pelvic limbs. Data were collected at 2, 5, 10, 15 and 30 minutes after the end of epidural injection. After the final time point, dogs were euthanatized and laminectomies were conducted to expose the extent of the dural dye staining. Results The volumes 0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 0.8 mL kg-1 of 0.25% Bu and MB blocked a mean of 5, 14.2, 20.2 and 21 dermatomes, respectively. The extent of the senory block increased up to a volume of 0.6 mL kg-1. Motor block was longer-lasting and more intense than sensory block. Complete dyeing of the spinal cord with MB was achieved in some dogs at 0.4 mL kg-1 and all dogs at 0.6 mL kg-1. Conclusions The volume of anesthetic injected into the epidural space plays an important role in the quality of the epidural anesthesia. At 0.25%, bupivacaine provided an efficient sensory block at 0.6 mL kg-1. Clinical relevance Relatively high volumes (0.6 mL kg-1) of 0.25%, BU and MB were needed to produce an effective sensory and motor block caudal to the umbilicus, but all spinal cord segments were reached by MB at this dose.

Dimensional Accuracy of Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Assisted Manufactured Orbital Prostheses

Purpose: The aim of this research was to assess the dimensional accuracy of orbital prostheses based on reversed images generated by computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD/CAM) using computed tomography (CT) scans. Materials and Methods: CT scans of the faces of 15 adults, men and women older than 25 years of age not bearing any congenital or acquired craniofacial defects, were processed using CAD software to produce 30 reversed three-dimensional models of the orbital region. These models were then processed using the CAM system by means of selective laser sintering to generate surface prototypes of the volunteers` orbital regions. Two moulage impressions of the faces of each volunteer were taken to manufacture 15 pairs of casts. Orbital defects were created on the right or left side of each cast. The surface prototypes were adapted to the casts and then flasked to fabricate silicone prostheses. The establishment of anthropometric landmarks on the orbital region and facial midline allowed for the data collection of 31 linear measurements, used to assess the dimensional accuracy of the orbital prostheses and their location on the face. Results: The comparative analyses of the linear measurements taken from the orbital prostheses and the opposite sides that originated the surface prototypes demonstrated that the orbital prostheses presented similar vertical, transversal, and oblique dimensions, as well as similar depth. There was no transverse or oblique displacement of the prostheses. Conclusion: From a clinical perspective, the small differences observed after analyzing all 31 linear measurements did not indicate facial asymmetry. The dimensional accuracy of the orbital prostheses suggested that the CAD/CAM system assessed herein may be applicable for clinical purposes. Int J Prosthodont 2010;23:271-276.

The Importance of Adhesive Area Delimitation in a Microshear Bond Strength Experimental Design

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the influence of adhesive area delimitation on the microshear bond strength of different adhesives to dentin. Materials and Methods: Eighteen bovine incisors were sectioned and the exposed dentin surfaces were prepared with 600-grit SIC paper. These teeth were randomly divided into three groups, according to the adhesive to be applied: two-step etch-and-rinse Adper Single Bond 2 (3M ESPE), two-step self-etching Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray), and one-step Clearfil S(3) Bond (Kuraray). On each dentin surface, 4 samples were built up with the composite resin Z100 (3M ESPE); on 2 of these, a suggested area delimitation technique was employed. After 24 h of storage in water at 37 degrees C, samples were subjected to the microshear bond strength test, and the failure modes were evaluated under optical and scanning electron microscopes. The obtained results were statistical analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey`s test. Results: Groups without area delimitation presented significantly higher bond strength results (p < 0.05) and a higher incidence of cohesive failures. In these groups, fractures tended to occur beyond the limits of the actual adhesive area, while the area restriction technique succeeded in avoiding this phenomenon. The three adhesives performed similarly when area delimitation was employed (p > 0.05), but Clearfil S(3) Bond showed significantly higher bond strength results when no area delimitation was taken into account (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The extension of the adhesive area beyond the limits of the composite cylinder may play an important role in the results of microshear bond strength tests, while the suggested area delimitation technique may lead to less questionable outcomes.