OBJECTIVE: To assess the color stability of five types of ceramic brackets after immersion in potentially staining solutions. METHODS: Ninety brackets were divided into 5 groups (n = 18) according to brackets commercial brands and the solutions in which they were immersed (coffee, red wine, coke and artificial saliva). The brackets assessed were Transcend (3M/Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA), Radiance (American Orthodontics, Sheboygan, WI, USA), Mystique (GAC International Inc., Bohemia, NY, USA) and Luxi II (Rocky Mountain Orthodontics, Denver, CO, USA). Chromatic changes were analyzed with the aid of a reflectance spectrophotometer and by visual inspection at five specific time intervals. Assessment periods were as received from the manufacturer (T0), 24 hours (T1), 72 hours (T2), as well as 7 days (T3) and 14 days (T4) of immersion in the aforementioned solutions. Results were submitted to statistical analysis with ANOVA and Bonferroni correction, as well as to a multivariate profile analysis for independent and paired samples with significance level set at 5%. RESULTS: The duration of the immersion period influenced color alteration of all tested brackets, even though these changes could not always be visually observed. Different behaviors were observed for each immersion solution; however, brackets immersed in one solution progressed similarly despite minor variations. CONCLUSIONS: Staining became more intense over time and all brackets underwent color alterations when immersed in the aforementioned solutions.

No abstract

No abstract

Aim To evaluate the effects of progressive root canal enlargements on the unprepared surface area and remaining dentine thickness of three‐rooted maxillary first premolars with different root configurations. Methodology Thirty three‐rooted maxillary first premolars with three root configurations (n = 10) were selected and scanned in a micro‐CT device. The root canals were sequentially enlarged with rotary instruments sizes 30.02 (step 1), 30.04 (step 2) and 30.06 (step 3). After each step, a new scan was taken. Analysed parameters included morphometric measurements (length, volume and surface area), number of static voxels and minimal dentine thickness. Statistical analyses were performed with one‐way anova post hoc Tukey tests and paired sample t‐test at a significance level of 5%. Results No statistical differences were observed amongst groups regarding the morphometric parameters and static voxels (p > .05). The minimal dentine thickness of the distobuccal root significantly changed depending on the root configuration (p < .05), whilst no differences were observed in the other roots (p > .05). A great variation in the position of the minimal dentine thickness was observed after preparation. Overall, mean percentage reduction in dentine thickness was higher in the buccal roots than in the palatal root (p < .05). In the mesiobuccal and distobuccal root, the number of slices with minimal dentine thickness lower than 0.05 mm increases 2 to 3 times and 3 to 4 times, respectively, from steps 1 to 3. Conclusions Instruments sizes 30.02 and 30.04 can be safely and effectively used to enlarge the buccal and palatal canals of three‐rooted maxillary first premolars.

Index values among the evaluated groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The use of NaOCl combined with PAA increased the BS of brackets bonded with RMGIC. The deproteinization of the group treated with PA reduced the shear bond strength of the brackets.