Pulp chamber temperature rise in light-cure bonding of brackets with and without primer, in intact versus restored teeth.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the pulp chamber temperature rise (PCTR) in light-cure bonding of brackets with and without primer, in intact and restored mandibular central incisors (M1), maxillary first premolars (Mx4), and mandibular third molars (M8). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ninety human teeth were included: M1 (n=30), Mx4 (n=30), and M8 (n=30). Light-cure bonding of brackets was performed in intact (n=60) and restored (n=30) teeth, with primer (n=60) or without (n=30) primer. PCTR was defined as the difference between initial (T0) and peak temperatures (T1), recorded with a thermocouple during light-cure bonding. Differences on PCTR between bonding techniques (primer vs. no primer), teeth types (M1 vs. Mx4 vs. M8), and teeth condition (intact vs. restored) were estimated by ANCOVA, with α=5%.Results: PCTR was significantly higher with the use of primer (2.05 ± 0.08oC) than without primer (1.65 ± 0.14oC) (p=0.02), and in M1 (2.23 ± 0.22oC) compared to Mx4 (1.56 ± 0.14oC) (p<0.01). There was no difference in the PCTR in M8 (1.77 ± 0.28oC) compared to M1 or Mx4 (p>0.05), and no difference between intact (1.78 ± 0.14oC) and restored (1.92 ± 0.08oC) teeth (p=0.38). There was no influence of dentin enamel thickness in the PCTR (p=0.19). CONCLUSION: PCTR was higher in light-cure bonding of brackets with primer, especially in M1. Light-cure bonding seems less invasive without primer.

Pulp chamber temperature rise in light-cure bonding of brackets with and without primer, in intact versus restored teeth

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the pulp chamber temperature rise (PCTR) in light-cure bonding of brackets with and without primer, in intact and restored mandibular central incisors (M1), maxillary first premolars (Mx4), and mandibular third molars (M8). Material and Methods: Ninety human teeth were included: M1 (n=30), Mx4 (n=30), and M8 (n=30). Light-cure bonding of brackets was performed in intact (n=60) and restored (n=30) teeth, with primer (n=60) or without (n=30) primer. PCTR was defined as the difference between initial (T0) and peak temperatures (T1), recorded with a thermocouple during light-cure bonding. Differences on PCTR between bonding techniques (primer vs. no primer), teeth types (M1 vs. Mx4 vs. M8), and teeth condition (intact vs. restored) were estimated by ANCOVA, with α=5%. Results: PCTR was significantly higher with the use of primer (2.05 ± 0.08oC) than without primer (1.65 ± 0.14oC) (p=0.02), and in M1 (2.23 ± 0.22oC) compared to Mx4 (1.56 ± 0.14oC) (p<0.01). There was no difference in the PCTR in M8 (1.77 ± 0.28oC) compared to M1 or Mx4 (p>0.05), and no difference between intact (1.78 ± 0.14oC) and restored (1.92 ± 0.08oC) teeth (p=0.38). There was no influence of dentin enamel thickness in the PCTR (p=0.19). Conclusion: PCTR was higher in light-cure bonding of brackets with primer, especially in M1. Light-cure bonding seems less invasive without primer.

RESUMO Objetivo: Comparar o aumento na temperatura da câmara pulpar (ATCP) na colagem de braquetes com fotoativação usando ou não primer, em dentes hígidos versus dentes restaurados, em incisivos centrais inferiores (ICI), primeiros pré-molares superiores (1PMS) e terceiros molares inferiores (3MI). Métodos: Foram incluídos noventa dentes humanos: ICI (n=30), 1PMS (n=30) e 3MI (n=30). A colagem de braquetes com fotoativação foi realizada em dentes hígidos (n=60) ou dentes restaurados (n=30), com primer (n=60) ou sem (n=30) primer. O ATCP foi definido como a diferença entre as temperaturas inicial (T0) e máxima (T1) registradas com um termômetro durante a colagem com fotoativação. As diferenças no ATCP entre as técnicas de colagem (com primer vs. sem primer), diferentes dentes (ICIvs.1PMSvs.3MI) e condição dos dentes (hígidos vs. restaurados) foram estimadas por ANCOVA, com α=5%. Resultados: O ATCP foi significativamente maior com o uso de primer (2,05 ± 0,08oC) do que sem primer (1,65 ± 0,14oC) (p=0,02), e no ICI (2,23 ± 0,22oC) do que no 1PMS (1,56 ± 0,14oC) (p<0,01). Não houve diferença no ATCP do 3MI (1,77 ± 0,28oC) em comparação com ICI ou 1PMS (p>0,05), e não houve diferença entre dentes hígidos (1,78 ± 0,14oC) e restaurados (1,92 ± 0,08oC) (p=0,38). Não houve influência da espessura da dentina e do esmalte no ATCP (p=0,19). Conclusão: O ATCP foi maior na colagem de braquetes com fotoativação usando primer, principalmente no ICI. A colagem com fotoativação parece ser menos invasiva sem primer.

Alterações transversais produzidas pela expansão rápida maxilar com diferentes parafusos expansores em pacientes com fissura de lábio e palato / Transverse changes produced by rapid maxillary expansion with different expander screws in cleft lip and palate patients

O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar e comparar os efeitos da expansão rápida maxilar em pacientes portadores de fissura de lábio e palato, utilizando aparelhos expansores com dois diferentes tipos de parafusos. A amostra foi constituída por 32 indivíduos com fissura transforame incisivo, com média de idade de 10,6 anos ± 1,73, os quais apresentavam atresia maxilar. Destes, 16 pacientes foram submetidos à expansão com parafuso limitador posterior (Grupo LP) e 16 com parafuso convencional (Grupo C), sendo avaliados em telerradiografias póstero-anteriores em dois momentos: inicial e imediatamente após a expansão. Na comparação entre os grupos (LP e C), foi utilizado o teste de comparações de médias t-student para amostras independentes, com nível de significância de 5%. Verificou-se que houve um aumento das dimensões transversas maxilares em ambos os grupos, porém maior no Grupo C, além disso, observou-se quantidade semelhante de expansão da cavidade nasal em ambos os grupos.

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effects of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) in patients with cleft lip and palate, using palatal expanders with two different jackscrews. The sample consisted of 32 patients, with maxillary constriction and mean age of 10.6 years ± 1.73. Sixteen of them were submitted to RME with fan type screw (Group FT) and 16 with conventional screw (Group C). Both groups were evaluated through postero-anterior cephalograms in two phases: initial and immediately after expansions. To compare LP and C groups Student’s t test was used with a 5% significance level. There was an increase in transverse dimensions for both groups, but it was higher in Group C. Similar expansion was observed in the nasal cavity of both groups...