Loss on drying, calcium concentration and pH of fluoride dentifrices.

INTRODUCTION: Fluoride dentifrices containing calcium carbonate have advantages such as control of dental plaque and progression of dental caries, also contributing to oral hygiene, represent most dentifrices marketed in Brazil. AIM: To evaluate the physicochemical properties of seven fluoride dentifrices containing calcium carbonate in relation to hydrogen potential (pH), loss on drying and calcium concentration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data collection was performed using the potentiometric method for pH ranges, gravimetric analysis for loss on drying and atomic absorption spectrometry for the concentration of calcium ions. All tests were performed in triplicate and the analysis was performed entirely at random according to one-way analysis of variance at 5% significance level. RESULTS: The pH values were alkaline and ranged from 8.67 (Oral-B 123(®)) to 10.03 (Colgate Máxima Proteção Anticáries(®)). The results of loss on drying ranged from 33.81% (Oral-B 123(®)) to 61.13% (Close Up(®)), with significant differences between brands tested. In relation to the calcium content, the highest and lowest concentrations were found in dentifrices Even(®) (155.55 g/kg) and Colgate Ultra Branco(®) (129 g/kg), respectively, with significant difference (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Fluoride dentifrices analyzed showed alkaline pH and high levels of loss on drying and calcium concentration. However, these physicochemical characteristics differed according to the different brands tested.

Use of cyanoacrylate in the coaptation of edges of surgical wounds.

Cyanoacrylate has been used in several fields of different surgical specialties as an adhesive for closure of gingival flaps and in mucous and cutaneous lacerations. One of its advantages is that it has an excellent immunological response. In view of aesthetic needs, cyanoacrylate has been applied with satisfactory results, when compared with sutures. It presents better coaptation of edges of cutaneous and mucosal lesions, smaller residual scars, and biocompatibility. However, it is limited to areas of little tissue tension. This work attempts to provide a literature review with the aim of revealing the advantages of using tissue adhesives, especially cyanoacrylates, in wound coaptation in comparison with conventional methods.

Use of cyanoacrylate in the coaptation of edges of surgical wounds / Aplicação do cianoacrilato na coaptação das bordas de feridas cirúrgicas

Cyanoacrylate has been used in several fields of different surgical specialties as an adhesive for closure of gingival flaps and in mucous and cutaneous lacerations. One of its advantages is that it has an excellent immunological response. In view of aesthetic needs, cyanoacrylate has been applied with satisfactory results, when compared with sutures. It presents better coaptation of edges of cutaneous and mucosal lesions, smaller residual scars, and biocompatibility. However, it is limited to areas of little tissue tension. This work attempts to provide a literature review with the aim of revealing the advantages of using tissue adhesives, especially cyanoacrylates, in wound coaptation in comparison with conventional methods.

O cianoacrilato tem sido utilizado em diversos campos das especialidades cirúrgicas como adesivo no fechamento de retalhos gengivais e em lacerações mucosas e cutâneas, além de apresentar uma ótima resposta imunológica. Tendo em vista as necessidades estéticas, o cianoacrilato tem sido aplicado com resultados satisfatórios quando comparado aos fios de sutura, pois apresenta melhor capacidade de coaptação das bordas de uma lesão de pele e mucosa, menor cicatriz residual e biocompatiblidade, estando limitado, entretanto, a zonas de baixa tensão tecidual. Frente a tais considerações, o presente trabalho busca desenvolver uma revisão literária, objetivando revelar as vantagens do uso dos adesivos teciduais, especialmente os cianoacrilatos, na coaptação de feridas, em detrimento da utilização dos métodos convencionais com fios de sutura.

Efeito inibitório de enxaguatórios bucais sobre o crescimento de Lactobacilos casei / Inhibitory effect of mouthwashes on Lactobacilus casei growth

Este estudo avaliou efeito inibitório de enxaguatórios bucais sobre o crescimento de Lactobacilos casei (ATCC 7469). A amostra foi composta por seis produtos (Plax®, Listerine®, Cepacol®, Oral B®, Sanifill® e Periogard®), os quais foram analisados quanto à determinação da Concentração Inibitória Mínima (CIM). A CIM dos enxaguatórios bucais Plax®, Listerine®, Cepacol®, Oral B®, Sanifill® e Periogard® foi verificada, respectivamente, nas concentrações 1:2, 1:8, 1:4, 1:8, 1:16 e 1:32. Concluiu-se que os enxaguatórios bucais apresentaram ação antimicrobiana frente a L. casei, sendo o maior efeito inibitório observado para o Periogard® e Sanifill®.

This study assessed the inhibitory effect of mouth rinses on the growth of Lactobacillus casei (ATCC 7469). The sample consisted of six products (Plax®, Listerine®, Cepacol®, Oral B®, Sanifill® and Periogard ®) which were analyzed to measure their Minimum Inhibitory Concentration (MIC). The MIC of the mouthwashes Plax®, Listerine®, Cepacol®, Oral B®, Sanifill® and Periogard® were measured at concentrations of 1:2, 1:8, 1:4, 1:8, 1:16, and 1:32, respectively. It was concluded that the mouthwashes presented antimicrobial activity against L. casei, and the largest inhibitory effect was with Periogard® and Sanifill®.

Endogenous pH, Titratable Acidity and Total Soluble Solid Content of Mouthwashes Available in the Brazilian Market.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate in vitro the endogenous pH, titratable acidity and total soluble solid content (TSSC) of mouthwashes available in the Brazilian market. METHODS: The study sample was composed of 10 commercial brands of mouthwashes based on different active ingredients: Cepacol(R), Clinerize(R), Equate(R), Listerine Cool Citrus(R), Oral-B(R), Periogard(R), Peroxyl(R), Plax Overnight(R), Prevident 220(R) and Sanifill(R). The experiments were performed in triplicate. The endogenous pH was evaluated by potentiometry, titratable acidity was evaluated by the addition of 0.1N KOH increments to the mouthwashes, and TSSC readings were performed by Brix refractometry using the Abbé refractometer. RESULTS: pH values ranged from 3.56 (Peroxyl(R)) to 7.43 (Cepacol(R)) and three mouthwashes presented pHs below 5.5. The titratable acidity values ranged from 0.007 (Periograd(R)) to 0.530 (Prevident(R)). Oral B(R) and Clinerize(R) presented the lowest (4.7%) and the highest (23.70%) TSSC, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Some of the mouthwashes evaluated in this study presented low endogenous pH, even below the critical value for enamel dissolution (pH<5.5), high titratable acidity and high TSSC, and may be potentially erosive to the dental tissues if not properly used.