Background: Evaluate the use of collagen matrix (CM) as adjunctive to coronally advanced flap (CAF versus CAF + CM) to treat gingival recession (GR) associated with non-carious cervical lesion-combined defects (CDs).Methods: Sixty-two patients presenting 62 CDs (RT1 GR and non-carious cervical lesion (NCCLs) were randomly allocated to either CAF group (n = 31): partial restoration of the NCCL and CAF; or to CAF + CM group (n = 31): partial restoration of the NCCL and CAF associated with CM. Clinical, esthetic, patientcentered outcomes, and restorative parameters were assessed. Results: After 12 months, CD coverage were 55.2% for CAF and 54.4% for CAF + CM (P = 0.8). Recession reduction were 1.9 ± 0.8 mm for CAF and 2.0 ± 0.7 mm for CAF + CM (P = 0.6). CAF+CM resulted in higher increase in keratinized tissue (KT) width (CAF: 0.3 ± 0.7 mm; CAF + CM: 0.9 ± 0.8 mm; P = 0.004) and KT thickness gain (CAF: 0.1 ± 0.3 mm; CAF + CM: 0.7 ± 0.2 mm; P = 0.001). Both treatments presented low postoperative pain and resulted in esthetics improvements. In addition, no restoration was lost, 27.4% showed a reduction of the superficial polishing, and 8% showed marginal staining, but still clinically acceptable. Conclusion: Partial resin composite restoration (with the apical limit up to 1 mm of the estimated CEJ) and CAF alone or combined with CM are suitable for treating CDs. The use of CM provided additional benefits in terms of KT width and thickness gain. (NCT03341598).

No abstract

No abstract

Aim This in situ study assessed the effects of adhesive systems containing or not fluoride and/or the antibacterial monomer 12-methacryloyloxydodecylpyridinium bromide (MDPB) on the microbiological composition of dental biofilm and enamel demineralization. Materials and methods During two phases of 14 days, ten volunteers wore intraoral palatal appliances containing two slabs of human enamel according to a double-blind, crossover design. The slabs were randomly restored using a composite resin and one of the following adhesive systems: All-Bond SETM (self-etch, fluoride/MDPB free adhesive, AB) and Clearfil Protect Bond (self-etch containing fluoride and MDPB adhesive, CB). The biofilm formed on the slabs was analyzed with regard to total and mutans streptococci and lactobacilli counts. Demineralization represented by integrated area of hardness × lesion depth Delta S (ƒ¢S) was determined on enamel by analysis of cross-sectional microhardness, at 20 and 70 ƒÊm from the restoration margin. Data were analyzed by ANOVA. Results No statistically significant difference was found either in enamel demineralization or in the microbiological composition of dental biofilm. Conclusion All adhesive systems containing or not fluoride and/or MDPB tested were unable to inhibit secondary caries in the in situ model used in the present research. How to cite this article de Vasconcelos SMLC, de Melo MAS, Wenceslau JPMS, Zanin ICJ, Beltrao HCP, Fernandes CAO, de Almeida PC, Rodrigues LKA. In situ Assessment of Effects of the Bromide- and Fluoride-Incorporating Adhesive Systems on Biofilm and Secondary Caries. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014;15(2):142-148.

No abstract

No abstract

Bioactive materials can reduce caries lesions on the marginal sealed teeth by providing the release of ions, such as calcium, phosphate, fluoride, zinc, magnesium, and strontium. The presence of such ions affects the dissolution balance of hydroxyapatite, nucleation, and epitaxial growth of its crystals. Previous studies mostly focused on the ion-releasing behavior of bioactive materials. Little is known about their wear behavior sealed tooth under mastication. This study aimed to evaluate the wear behavior and surface quality of dental bioactive resins under a simulated chewing model and compare them with a resin without bioactive agents. Three bioactive resins (Activa, BioCoat, and Beautifil Flow-Plus) were investigated. A resin composite without bioactive agents was used as a control group. Each resin was applied to the occlusal surface of extracted molars and subjected to in vitro chewing simulation model. We have assessed the average surface roughness (Ra), maximum high of the profile (Rt), and maximum valley depth (Rv) before and after the chewing simulation model. Vickers hardness and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) also analyzed the final material surface quality). Overall, all groups had increased surface roughness after chewing simulation. SEM analysis revealed a similar pattern among the materials. However, the resin with polymeric microcapsules doped with bioactive agents (BioCoat) showed increased surface roughness parameters. The material with Surface Pre-reacted Glass Ionomer (Beautifil Flow-Plus) showed no differences compared to the control group and improved microhardness. The addition of bioactive agents may influence surface properties, impairing resin composites' functional and biological properties. Future studies are encouraged to analyze bioactive resin composites under high chemical and biological challenges in vitro with pH cycles or in situ models.

No abstract