Streptococcus mutans forms xylitol-resistant biofilm on excess adhesive flash in novel ex-vivo orthodontic bracket model.

INTRODUCTION: During orthodontic bonding procedures, excess adhesive is invariably left on the tooth surface at the interface between the bracket and the enamel junction; it is called excess adhesive flash (EAF). We comparatively evaluated the biofilm formation of Streptococcus mutans on EAF produced by 2 adhesives and examined the therapeutic efficacy of xylitol on S mutans formed on EAF. METHODS: First, we investigated the biofilm formation of S mutans on 3 orthodontic bracket types: stainless steel preadjusted edgewise, ceramic preadjusted edgewise, and stainless steel self-ligating. Subsequently, tooth-colored Transbond XT (3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) and green Grengloo (Ormco, Glendora, Calif) adhesives were used for bonding ceramic brackets to extracted teeth. S mutans biofilms on EAF produced by the adhesives were studied using the crystal violet assay and scanning electron microscopy. Surface roughness and surface energy of the EAF were examined. The therapeutic efficacies of different concentrations of xylitol were tested on S mutans biofilms. RESULTS: Significantly higher biofilms were formed on the ceramic preadjusted edgewise brackets (P = 0.003). Transbond XT had significantly higher S mutans biofilms compared with Grengloo surfaces (P = 0.007). There was no significant difference in surface roughness between Transbond XT and Grengloo surfaces (P >0.05). Surface energy of Transbond XT had a considerably smaller contact angle than did Grengloo, suggesting that Transbond XT is a more hydrophilic material. Xylitol at low concentrations had no significant effect on the reduction of S mutans biofilms on orthodontic adhesives (P = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Transbond XT orthodontic adhesive resulted in more S mutans biofilm compared with Grengloo adhesive on ceramic brackets. Surface energy seemed to play a more important role than surface roughness for the formation of S mutans biofilm on EAF. Xylitol does not appear to have a therapeutic effect on mature S mutans biofilm.

Stereopsis-dependent deficits in maximum motion displacement in strabismic and anisometropic amblyopia.

Direction discrimination thresholds for maximum motion displacement (D(max)) have been previously reported to be abnormal in amblyopic children [Ho, C. S., Giaschi, D. E., Boden, C., Dougherty, R., Cline, R., & Lyons, C. (2005). Deficient motion perception in the fellow eye of amblyopic children. Vision Research, 45, 1615-1627; Ho, C. S., & Giaschi, D. E. (2006). Deficient maximum motion displacement in amblyopia. Vision Research, 46, 4595-4603]. We looked at D(max) thresholds for random dot kinematograms (RDKs) biased toward low- or high-level motion mechanisms. D(max) is thought to be limited, for high-level motion mechanisms, by the efficiency of object feature tracking and probability of false matches. To reduce the influence of low-level mechanisms, we determined thresholds also for a high-pass filtered version of the RDKs. Performance did not significantly differ between strabismic and anisometropic groups with amblyopia, although both groups performed significantly worse than the age-matched control group. D(max) thresholds were higher for children with poor stereoacuity. This was significant in both anisometropic and strabismic groups, and more robust for high-pass filtered RDKs than for unfiltered RDKs. The results imply that impairment of the extra-striate dorsal stream is a likely part of the neural deficit underlying both strabismic and anisometropic amblyopia. This deficit appears to be more dependent on extent of binocularity than etiology. Our findings suggest a possible relationship between fine stereopsis, coarse stereopsis, and motion correspondence mechanisms.

Deficient motion-defined and texture-defined figure-ground segregation in amblyopic children.

PURPOSE: Motion-defined form deficits in the fellow eye and the amblyopic eye of children with amblyopia implicate possible direction-selective motion processing or static figure-ground segregation deficits. Deficient motion-defined form perception in the fellow eye of amblyopic children may not be fully accounted for by a general motion processing deficit. This study investigates the contribution of figure-ground segregation deficits to the motion-defined form perception deficits in amblyopia. METHODS: Performances of 6 amblyopic children (5 anisometropic, 1 anisostrabismic) and 32 control children with normal vision were assessed on motion-defined form, texture-defined form, and global motion tasks. RESULTS: Performance on motion-defined and texture-defined form tasks was significantly worse in amblyopic children than in control children. Performance on global motion tasks was not significantly different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Faulty figure-ground segregation mechanisms are likely responsible for the observed motion-defined form perception deficits in amblyopia.

Deficient maximum motion displacement in amblyopia.

Direction discrimination thresholds for maximum motion displacement (Dmax) are not fixed, but are stimulus dependent. Dmax increases with reduced dot probability or increased dot size. We previously reported abnormal Dmax in the fellow eyes of amblyopic children for dense patterns of small dots. To determine how deficits of Dmax in amblyopic eyes compare to those in fellow eyes, thresholds were obtained in both eyes of 9 children with unilateral amblyopia and 9 control children. The expected increase in Dmax was observed for reduced dot probability and increased dot size conditions relative to baseline in both control and amblyopic groups. Both eyes of the amblyopic group demonstrated significant deficits. Our findings implicate abnormal binocular motion processing, which may involve both low-level and high-level motion mechanisms, in the neural deficit underlying amblyopia.

Deficient motion perception in the fellow eye of amblyopic children.

The extent of motion processing deficits and M/dorsal pathway involvement in amblyopia is unclear. Fellow eye performance was assessed in amblyopic children for motion-defined (MD) form, global motion, and maximum displacement (Dmax) tasks. Group performance on MD form was significantly worse in amblyopic children than in control children. Global motion deficits were significantly related to residual binocular function. Abnormally elevated Dmax thresholds were most prevalent in children with anisometropia. Our findings from these three uncorrelated tasks implicate involvement of binocular motion-sensitive mechanisms in the neural deficits of amblyopic children with strabismic, anisometropic, and aniso-strabismic etiologies.

Low- and high-level motion perception deficits in anisometropic and strabismic amblyopia: evidence from fMRI.

Maximum motion displacement (Dmax) is the largest dot displacement in a random-dot kinematogram (RDK) at which direction of motion can be correctly discriminated [Braddick, O. (1974). A short-range process in apparent motion. Vision Research, 14, 519-527]. For first-order RDKs, Dmax gets larger as dot size increases and/or dot density decreases. It has been suggested that this increase in Dmax reflects greater involvement of high-level feature-matching motion mechanisms and less dependence on low-level motion detectors [Sato, T. (1998). Dmax: Relations to low- and high-level motion processes. In T. Watanabe (Ed.), High-level motion processing, computational, neurobiological, and psychophysical perspectives (pp. 115-151). Boston: MIT Press]. Recent psychophysical findings [Ho, C. S., & Giaschi, D. E. (2006). Deficient maximum motion displacement in amblyopia. Vision Research, 46, 4595-4603; Ho, C. S., & Giaschi, D. E. (2007). Stereopsis-dependent deficits in maximum motion displacement. Vision Research, 47, 2778-2785] suggest that this "switch" from low-level to high-level motion processing is also observed in children with anisometropic and strabismic amblyopia as RDK dot size is increased and/or dot density is decreased. However, both high- and low-level Dmax were reduced relative to controls. In this study, we used functional MRI to determine the motion-sensitive areas that may account for the reduced Dmax in amblyopia In the control group, low-level RDKs elicited stronger responses in low-level (posterior occipital) areas and high-level RDKs elicited a greater response in high-level (extra-striate occipital-parietal) areas when activation for high-level RDKs was compared to that for low-level RDKs. Participants with anisometropic amblyopia showed the same pattern of cortical activation although extent of activation differences was less than in controls. For those with strabismic amblyopia, there was almost no difference in the cortical activity for low-level and high-level RDKs, and activation was reduced relative to the other groups. Differences in the extent of cortical activation may be related to amblyogenic subtype.

Low- and high-level first-order random-dot kinematograms: evidence from fMRI.

Maximum motion displacement (Dmax) represents the largest dot displacement in a random-dot kinematogram (RDK) at which direction of motion can be discriminated. Direction discrimination thresholds for maximum motion displacement (Dmax) are not fixed but are stimulus dependent. For first-order RDKs, Dmax is larger as dot size increases and/or dot density decreases. Dmax may be limited by the receptive field size of low-level motion detectors when the dots comprising the RDK are small and densely spaced. With RDKs of increased dot size/decreased dot density, however, Dmax exceeds the spatial limits of these detectors and is likely determined by high-level feature-matching mechanisms. Using functional MRI, we obtained greater activation in posterior occipital areas for low-level RDKs and greater activation in extra-striate occipital and parietal areas for high-level RDKs. This is the first reported neuroimaging evidence supporting proposed low-level and high-level models of motion processing for first-order random-dot stimuli.