847 resultados para Auditory loss
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Heat stress has negative effects on pregnancy rates of lactating dairy cattle. There are genetic differences in tolerance to heat stress; Bos taurus indicus (B. t. indicus) cattle and embryos are more thermotolerant than Bos taurus taurus (B. t. taurus). In the present study, the effects of sire and sire breed on conception and embryonic/fetal loss rates of lactating Holstein cows during the Brazilian summer were determined. In Experiment 1, cows (n = 302) were AI after estrus detection or at a fixed-time with semen from one Gyr (B. t. indicus) or one Holstein sire (B. t. taurus). Pregnancy was diagnosed 80 days after AI. In Experiment 2, cows (n = 811) were AI with semen from three Gyr and two Holstein sires. Pregnancy was diagnosed at 30-40 and at 60-80 days after AI. Cows diagnosed pregnant at the first examination but non-pregnant at the second were considered as having lost their embryo or fetus. Data were analyzed by logistic regression. The model considered the effect of sire within breed, sire breed, days postpartum, period of lactation, and AI type (AI after estrus versus fixed-time). There was no effect of the AI type, days postpartum or milk production on conception or embryonic loss rates. The use of Gyr bulls increased pregnancy rate when compared to Holstein bulls [9.1% (60/657) versus 5.0% (23/456), respectively, P = 0.008; data from Experiments 1 and 2 combined]. Additionally, in Experiment 2, cows inseminated using semen from sire #4 (Gyr) had lower embryonic loss (10%) when compared with other B. t. indicus (35.3% and 40%) or B. t. taurus sires (18.2% and 38.5%, P = 0.03). In conclusion, the use of B. t. indicus sires may result in higher conception rates in lactating Holstein cows during summer heat stress. Moreover, sire can affect embryonic loss and selection of bulls according to this criterion may result in higher parturition rates in lactating Holstein cows. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Resumo:
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
Resumo:
Purpose: This study used bovine ribs to comparatively assess the deformation, roughness, and mass loss for 3 different types of surface treatments with burs, used in osteotomies, for the installation of osseointegrated implants.Materials and Methods: The study used 25 bovine ribs and 3 types of helical burs (2.0 mm and 3.0 mm) for osteotomies during implant placement (a steel bur [G1], a bur with tungsten carbide film coating in a carbon matrix [G2], and a zirconia bur [G3]), which were subdivided into 5 subgroups: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, corresponding to 0, 10, 20, 30, and 40 perforations, respectively. The surface roughness (mean roughness [Ra], partial roughness, and maximum roughness) and mass (in grams) of all the burs were measured, and the burs were analyzed in a scanning electron microscope before and after use. Data were tabulated and statistically analyzed by use of the Kruskal-Wallis test, and when a statistically significant difference was found, the Dunn test was used.Results: There was a loss of mass in all groups (G1, G2, and G3), and this loss was gradual, according to the number of perforations made (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5). However, this difference was not statistically significant (P < .05). Regarding the roughness, G3 presented an increase in Ra, partial roughness, and maximum roughness (P < .05) compared with G2 and an increase in Ra compared with G1. There was no statistically significant difference (P > .05) between G1 and G2. The scanning electron microscopy analysis found areas of deformation in all the 2.0-mm samples, with loss of substrates, and this characteristic was more frequent in G3.Conclusions: The 2.0-mm zirconia burs had a greater loss of substrates and abrasive wear in the cutting area. They also presented an increased roughness when compared with the steel and the tungsten carbide coating film in carbon matrix. There was no statistically significant difference (P < .05) between G1 and G2 in any mechanical test carried out. (C) 2012 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons J Oral Maxillofac Surg 70:e608-e621, 2012
Resumo:
Purpose: The vertical location of the implant-abutment connection influences the subsequent reaction of the peri-implant bone. It is not known, however, whether any additional influence is exerted by different microgap configurations. Therefore, the radiographic bone reactions of two different implant systems were monitored for 6 months. Materials and Methods: In eight mongrel dogs, two implants with an internal Morse-taper connection (INT group) were placed on one side of the mandible; the contralateral side received two implants with an external-hex connection (EXT group). on each side, one implant was aligned at the bone level (equicrestal) and the second implant was placed 1.5 mm subcrestal. Healing abutments were placed 3 months after submerged healing, and the implants were maintained for another 3 months without prosthetic loading. At implant placement and after 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 months, standardized radiographs were obtained, and peri-implant bone levels were measured with regard to microgap location and evaluated statistically. Results: All implants osseointegrated clinically and radiographically. The overall mean bone loss was 0.68 +/- 0.59 mm in the equicrestal INT group, 1.32 +/- 0.49 mm in the equicrestal EXT group, 0.76 +/- 0.49 mm in the subcrestal INT group, and 1.88 +/- 0.81 mm in the subcrestal EXT group. The differences between the INT and EXT groups were statistically significant (paired t tests). The first significant differences between the internal and external groups were seen at month 1 in the subcrestal groups and at 3 months in the equicrestal groups. Bone loss was most pronounced in the subcrestal EXT group. Conclusions: Within the limits of this study, different microgap configurations can cause different amounts of bone loss, even before prosthetic loading. Subcrestal placement of a butt-joint microgap design may lead to more pronounced radiographic bone loss. INT J ORAL MAXILLOFAC IMPLANTS 2011;26:941-946