Purpose: Compare the roughness of self-curing acrylic resin and the flexural strength of nickel-chrome (Ni-Cr) wires of orthodontic appliances submitted to different cleaning processes. Materials and methods: Samples were made with NiCr orthodontic wires bent into a “T” loop and embedded in self-curing acrylic resin and submitted to four different cleaning procedures (n = 21): Group 1 – immersion for 15 minutes in deionized water and active oxygen-based tablet; Group 2 - immersion for 15 minutes in chlorhexidine 0.12%; Group 3 – spray with chlorhexidine 0.12% solution; and Group 4 – immersion in deionized water (control) por 15 minutes twice a day. Flexural strength of the orthodontic wire and roughness of the acrylic resin surface were determined at baseline as well as 90 and 120 days using an optical microscope. Normality of the data was determined using the Shapiro-Wilk test. The Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used for comparisons of surface roughness. ANOVA followed by Duncan’s post hoc test was used for the comparison of flexural strength (α = 0.05). Results: No significant difference in surface roughness was found, except in Group 4, in which the last reading (2.25 ± 0.89) was significantly higher than the baseline reading (1.15 ± 0.27) (p = 0.013). Significant reductions in the flexural strength of the wires occurred in all groups (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Immersion in the cleaning solutions did not alter the surface roughness of the acrylic resin but promoted a reduction in the flexural strength of the wires.
OBJECTIVE: To identify all current treatment methods for symptomatic pericoronitis around the mandibular third molar, in the current context, to guide the clinical practice of dental surgeons. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The review protocol was previously registered (PROSPERO; CRD42019138130). Searches were conducted in MEDLINE [Pubmed], Web of Science, and Virtual Health Library databases, including studies published from 1st January 2000 to 30th June 2019. All studies reporting any treatment for pericoronitis and their efficacy in affected patients, evaluating at least one of the following variables of interest, were included: pain, swelling, trismus, presence and/or amount of bacteria, inflammatory infiltrate, and quality of life. RESULTS: A total of nine studies were included. Interventions included laser therapy, ozone therapy, trichloroacetic acid, curettage and sodium hydrochloride irrigation, electroacupuncture, magnesium sulfate and methocarbamol, hydrogen peroxide mouthwash, green tea and chlorhexidine mouthwash, and antibiotic therapies. Antibiotics were prescribed in the majority of cases reported in these studies. CONCLUSIONS: The present review suggests that the most common treatment for pericoronitis with satisfactory results is the use of antibiotic therapy associated with curettage and chlorhexidine irrigation. Due to the heterogeneity between the studies and methods used, it was not possible to confirm the effectiveness of one treatment in relation to the others. Future clinical trials are recommended for definitive conclusions about treatment for pericoronitis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.