Title |
Bacterial endotoxin adhesion to different types of orthodontic adhesives
|
---|---|
Published in |
Journal of Applied Oral Science, January 2017
|
DOI | 10.1590/1678-7757-2016-0434 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Priscilla Coutinho Romualdo, Thaís Rodrigues Guerra, Fábio Lourenço Romano, Raquel Assed Bezerra da Silva, Izaíra Tincani Brandão, Célio Lopes Silva, Lea Assed Bezerra da Silva, Paulo Nelson-Filho |
Abstract |
The aim of this study was to assess whether LPS adheres to orthodontic adhesive systems, comparing two commercial brands. Forty specimens were fabricated from Transbond XT and Light Bond composite and bonding agent components (n=10/component), then contaminated by immersion in a bacterial endotoxin solution. Contaminated and non-contaminated acrylic resin samples were used as positive and negative control groups, respectively. LPS quantification was performed by the Limulus Amebocyte Lysate QCL-1000™ test. Data obtained were scored and subjected to the Chi-square test using a significance level of 5%. There was endotoxin adhesion to all materials (p<0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between composites/bonding agents and acrylic resin (p>0.05). There was no significant difference (p>0.05) among commercial brands. Affinity of endotoxin was significantly greater for the bonding agents (p=0.0025). LPS adhered to both orthodontic adhesive systems. Regardless of the brand, the endotoxin had higher affinity for the bonding agents than for the composites. There is no previous study assessing the affinity of LPS for orthodontic adhesive systems. This study revealed that LPS adheres to orthodontic adhesive systems. Therefore, additional care is recommended to orthodontic applications of these materials. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 4 | 18% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 14% |
Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 14% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
Other | 1 | 5% |
Other | 2 | 9% |
Unknown | 6 | 27% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 36% |
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
Sports and Recreations | 1 | 5% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 10 | 45% |