RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Previous literature data has extensively assessed the biocompatibility of various orthodontic adhesives and their components, where the results of most of the studies showed cytotoxic effects of different degrees owing to the unbound molecules released structurally from the cured components. AIM: The present in-vitro study was aimed to assess the release of titanium dioxide nanoparticles in the artificial saliva from the orthodontic composites impregnated with titanium dioxide nanoparticles of 5% w/w (weight/weight) and 1% w/w used for metal brackets bonding. METHODS: The study assessed 160 teeth extracted freshly during orthodontic treatment and divided into two groups of 80 samples, each that bonded to orthodontic brackets having 5% w/w and 1% w/w composites with titanium dioxide nanoparticles kept in the artificial saliva. Quantification was done for 5% w/w and 1% w/w composites having titanium nanoparticles with inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy at 24 hours, two, four, and six months. RESULTS: It was seen that in teeth with 1% titanium dioxide, the greatest titanium release was seen at two months, with non-significant release after two months. In teeth with 5% w/w titanium dioxide nanoparticles showed significant titanium release all the time. A significantly greater titanium dioxide release on increasing concentration from 1% to 5% was seen for the 5% w/w group at all the assessment times. CONCLUSION: The present study concludes that a higher release of titanium is seen in 5% w/w composite containing titanium dioxide nanoparticles, and the concentrations of 1% and 5% can be safely used and are considered to be within permissible limits.
RESUMEN
Background A range of diseases affecting the jaw muscles and/or temporomandibular joint are referred to as temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). Nearly 80% of the general population is affected by TMDs, and 48% of those people have trouble opening their mouths and have painful muscles. Aim To compare the effectiveness of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and microcurrent nerve stimulation (MENS) for the relief of masticatory muscle discomfort. Methods Groups I and II were further separated into two groups of 30 persons each (A and B), as well as subgroups C and D. Subjects in Group I received TENS treatment for 20 minutes at frequencies of 0-5 and 5-5 for subgroups A and B, and with visual analog scale (VAS) scores of 1-5 and 6-10 for subgroups C and D, respectively. Subjects in Group II received MENS for 20 minutes, with subgroups C and D receiving the same frequency and VAS score as subgroups A and B, respectively. All individuals underwent treatment with a comparable frequency and length of time every day for five days. Results For subgroup D treated with MENS, there was a considerable reduction in pain; however, for subgroups A and C, there was a comparable reduction in the VAS score for both groups treated with MENS and TENS therapy. Conclusion Compared to TENS, MENS provides quicker and more effective pain relief. Paresthesia and tingling are two adverse effects of TENS that are not present with MENS. However, MENS and TENS are equally helpful at treating masticatory muscle discomfort that is both acute and chronic, as well as improving mouth opening.