Technetium Tc-99m albumin aggregated kit

Bioactive fillers in dental adhesives are designed to release beneficial ions, such as calcium and phosphate, to help in remineralization process, and preventing secondary caries. Their incorporation also aims to improve the longevity of dental restorations. Herein, CaP nanoparticles were synthesized through a water-in-oil emulsion method using Tween80 as a surfactant and methacrylic acid (MAA). MAA officiated as a co-surfactant and reduced the size of CaP nanoparticle, including improved compatibility with the components of dental adhesive. The incorporation of 2% T80/CaP/MAA nanofillers into dental adhesive demonstrated increased efficiency, as evidenced by a higher degree of conversion (%DC) and greater micro-tensile bond strength (μTBS). More importantly, T80/CaP/MAA nanofillers were able to induce remineralization process in the dental structure, which was confirmed by EDX mapping and IR imaging. Finally, a cytotoxicity assessment of the dental adhesive containing T80/CaP/MAA showed no significant adverse effects on human fibroblast cells.

Background and objectives A modified aligner appliance with nickel-titanium springs (MAA) is a relatively new appliance that has not received extensive attention in orthodontics. This study evaluated the patient-reported outcomes when orthodontic treatment was provided using a modified aligner appliance to treat mild lower incisor crowding. Materials and methods This prospective cohort study consisted of 42 patients (11 males and 31 females; mean age 21.69 ± 2.56 years) with mild crowding. Twenty-one patients were treated using a modified aligner with nickel-titanium springs, while the remaining patients were treated with a conventional fixed orthodontic appliance (FA). Patient responses regarding pain, discomfort, and difficulty in chewing, swallowing, and speaking were recorded using a visual analog scale (VAS) at six assessment times: 24 hours (T1), two days (T2), three days (T3), two weeks (T4), one month (T5), and two months (T6) after appliance application. Results The mean perceived pain and discomfort levels were generally lower in the traditional fixed appliance (FA) group than the modified aligner appliance with nickel-titanium springs group at most assessment times. However, no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups. Chewing difficulty levels were similar between the two groups with no substantial differences. Swallowing and speech difficulty were significantly higher in the MAA group compared to the FA group during the first two days of treatment (P < 0.008). Conclusions Patients using both types of orthodontic appliances experienced temporary discomfort, including pain and difficulty chewing. While the modified aligners appliance with nickel-titanium springs caused additional challenges with swallowing and speaking, these issues were resolved over time, allowing patients to adjust to the treatment.