METHODS: This study included 3 groups with 15 orthodontic patients in each. The control group included patients who had no probiotic treatment, the subjects in the kefir group consumed 2 × 100 ml of kefir (Atatürk Orman Ciftligi, Ankara, Turkey) per day, and the subjects in the toothpaste group brushed their teeth with toothpaste with probiotic content (GD toothpaste; Dental Asia Manufacturing, Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia) twice a day. Samples were collected at 3 times: beginning of the study, 3 weeks later, and 6 weeks later. The salivary flow rate, buffer capacity, and Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus levels in the saliva were evaluated. Chair-side kits were used to determine the S mutans and Lactobacillus levels.
RESULTS: A statistically significant decrease was observed in the salivary S mutans and Lactobacillus levels in the kefir and toothpaste groups compared with the control group (P <0.05). A statistically significant increase was observed in the toothpaste group compared with the control and kefir groups in buffer capacity. Changes in the salivary flow rate were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: The regular use of probiotics during fixed orthodontic treatment reduces the S mutans and Lactobacillus levels in the saliva.
BACKGROUND: SES may provide a valuable option to treat distal ULM, particularly when significant caliber gaps with side branches are observed.
METHODS: Patients from the multicenter SPARTA (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02784405) and FAILS2 registries were included. Propensity-score with matching was performed to account for the lack of randomization. Primary end-point was the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, a composite of all cause death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization [TLR], unstable angina and definite stent thrombosis [ST]). Single components of MACE were the secondary end-points.
RESULTS: Overall, 151 patients treated with SES and 1270 with DES-II were included; no differences in MACE rate at 250 days were observed (9.8% vs. 11.5%, P = 0.54). After propensity score with matching, 129 patients treated with SES and 258 with DES-II, of which about a third of female gender, were compared. After a follow-up of 250 days, MACE rate did not differ between the two groups (9.9% vs. 8.5%, P = 0.66), as well as the rate of ULM TLR (1.6% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.36) and definite ST (0.8% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.78). These results were consistent also when controlling for the treatment with provisional vs. 2-stents strategies for the ULM bifurcation.
CONCLUSION: SES use for ULM treatment was associated with a similar MACE rate compared to DES-II at an intermediate-term follow-up. SES might represent a potential option in this setting.