Methods: A total of eighteen (18) malocclusion patients were identified. Malocclusion patients were subdivided into 3 groups based on the bracket selection (conventional, self-ligating, and ceramic bracket) with 6 patients for each group. sEMG of muscles were done using a two-channel electromyography device, where pregelled and self-adhesive electrodes (bilateral) were applied. Chewing and clenching of masseter and temporalis muscle activity were recorded for 20 s pre and 6 months of orthodontic treatment using sEMG (frequency 60 Hz). The data were analysed by using repeated measures ANOVA in IBM SPSS Statistics Version 24.0.
Results: Chewing and clenching for masseter muscle showed no significant difference (P > 0.05) in sEMG activity of three types of the brackets. However, for temporalis muscle, there was a significant difference found in sEMG activity during chewing (P < 0.05) and clenching (P < 0.05) between these three brackets.
Conclusion: The activity of temporalis muscle showed significant changes in chewing and clenching, where the conventional group demonstrated better muscle activity pre and at six months of fixed appliances.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A gypsum mold was coated with clear acrylic spray. The coated mold was then used to produce modified silicone experimental specimens (n = 35). The surface roughness of the modified silicone elastomers was compared with that of the control specimens, which were prepared by conventional flasking methods (n = 35). An atomic force microscope (AFM) was used for surface roughness measurement of silicone elastomer (unmodified and modified), and a scanning electron microscope (SEM) was used to evaluate the topographic conditions of coated and noncoated gypsum and silicone elastomer specimens (unmodified and modified) groups. After the gypsum molds were characterized, the fabricated silicone elastomers molded on noncoated and coated gypsum materials were evaluated further. Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) analysis of gypsum materials (noncoated and coated) and silicone elastomer specimens (unmodified and modified) was performed to evaluate the elemental changes after coating was conducted. Independent t test was used to analyze the differences in the surface roughness of unmodified and modified silicone at a significance level of p < 0.05.
RESULTS: Roughness was significantly reduced in the silicone elastomers processed against coated gypsum materials (p < 0.001). The AFM and SEM analysis results showed evident differences in surface smoothness. EDX data further revealed the presence of the desired chemical components on the surface layer of unmodified and modified silicone elastomers.
CONCLUSIONS: Silicone elastomers with lower surface roughness of maxillofacial prostheses can be obtained simply by coating a gypsum mold.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Candida albicans, Streptococcus mutans, and Staphylococcus aureus were incubated with modified and unmodified silicone groups (N = 35) for 30 days at 37°C. The counts of viable microorganisms in the accumulating biofilm layer were determined and converted to cfu/cm2 unit surface area. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) was used to evaluate the microbial adhesion. Statistical analysis was performed using t-test, one-way ANOVA, and post hoc tests as indicated.
RESULTS: Significant differences in microbial adhesion were observed between modified and unmodified silicone elastomers after the cells were incubated for 30 days (p < 0.001). SEM showed evident differences in microbial adhesion on modified silicone elastomer compared with unmodified silicone elastomer.
CONCLUSIONS: Surface modification of silicone elastomer yielding a smoother and less porous surface showed lower adhesion of different microorganisms than observed on unmodified surfaces.
Materials and Methods: Twenty patients with Angle's class II div 1 (10 males and 10 females; aged 20.25 ± 3.88 years) needing bilateral extractions of maxillary first bicuspids were recruited. Conventional brackets MBT of 0.022 in slot (McLaughlin Bennett Trevisi) prescription braces (Ortho Organizers, Carlsbad, Calif) were bonded. After alignment and levelling phase, cuspid retraction began with nitinol closed coil spring on 19 × 25 stainless steel archwire, wielding 150 gram force. 7.5 J/cm2 energy was applied on 10 points (5 buccal and 5 palatal) on the canine roots on the investigational side using gallium-aluminum-arsenic diode laser (940 nm wavelength, iLase™ Biolase, Irvine, USA) in a continuous mode. Target tissues were irradiated once in three weeks for 9 weeks at a stretch (T0, T1, and T2). Patients were given a feedback form based on the numeric rating scale (NRS) to record the pain intensity for a week. Silicon impressions preceded the coil activation at each visit (T0, T1, T2, and T3), and the casts obtained were scanned with the Planmeca CAD/CAM™ (Helsinki, Finland) scanner.
Results: The regimen effectively accelerated (1.55 ± 0.25 mm) tooth movement with a significant reduction in distress on the investigational side as compared to the placebo side (94 ± 0.25 mm) (p < 0.05).
Conclusions: This study reveals that the thrice-weekly LLLT application can accelerate OTM and reduce the associated pain.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cytotoxicity was studied by examining the hFOB cell response by MTT assessment. The cell morphology was evaluated by inverted microscopy and observed under scanning electronic microscopy (SEM).
RESULTS: MTT assay results displayed that the Cu content on the surface of Ti-6Al-7Nb alloys did not produce any cytotoxic effect on cell viability. The cell viability rate in all samples ranges from 97% to 126%, indicating that hFOB cells grew at a high proliferation rate. However, no significant differences in cell viability were observed between Ti and Ti Cu and between Ti HA and Ti Cu/HA groups. Microscopic examination demonstrated no difference in the cell morphology of hFOB among all samples. In addition, SEM observation indicated favorable adhesion and spreading of the cells on the coated and uncoated samples.
CONCLUSIONS: The surface modification of Ti-6Al-7Nb alloy with Cu, HA, and Cu/HA exhibits good cell biocompatibility, and the Cu has no influence on the cell proliferation and differentiation of hFOB.
METHODS: Twenty-two patients (11 male, 11 female; mean age, 19.8 ± 3.1 years) with Angle Class II Division 1 malocclusion were recruited for this split-mouth clinical trial; they required extraction of maxillary first premolars bilaterally. After leveling and alignment with self-ligating brackets (SmartClip SL3; 3M Unitek, St Paul, Minn), a 150-g force was applied to retract the canines bilaterally using 6-mm nickel-titanium closed-coil springs on 0.019 x 0.025-in stainless steel archwires. A gallium-aluminum-arsenic diode laser (iLas; Biolase, Irvine, Calif) with a wavelength of 940 nm in a continuous mode (energy density, 7.5 J/cm2/point; diameter of optical fiber tip, 0.04 cm2) was applied at 5 points buccally and palatally around the canine roots on the experimental side; the other side was designated as the placebo. Laser irradiation was applied at baseline and then repeated after 3 weeks for 2 more consecutive follow-up visits. Questionnaires based on the numeric rating scale were given to the patients to record their pain intensity for 1 week. Impressions were made at each visit before the application of irradiation at baseline and the 3 visits. Models were scanned with a CAD/CAM scanner (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland).
RESULTS: Canine retraction was significantly greater (1.60 ± 0.38 mm) on the experimental side compared with the placebo side (0.79 ± 0.35 mm) (P <0.05). Pain was significantly less on the experimental side only on the first day after application of LLLI and at the second visit (1.4 ± 0.82 and 1.4 ± 0.64) compared with the placebo sides (2.2 ± 0.41 and 2.4 ± 1.53).
CONCLUSIONS: Low-level laser irradiation applied at 3-week intervals can accelerate orthodontic tooth movement and reduce the pain associated with it.