Background:The mouth provides an environment that allows the colonization and growth of a wide variety of microorganisms, especially bacteria. One of the most effective ways to reduce oral microorganisms is using mouthwashes.Objectives:The aim of this study was to investigate the antibacterial effects of chlorhexidine mouthwashes (manufacture by Livar, Behsa, Boht) on common oral microorganisms.Materials and Methods:In this in vitro study, isolated colonies of four bacteria, including Streptococcus mutans, S. sanguinis, S. salivarius and Lactobacillus casei, were prepared for an antimicrobial mouth rinse test. The tube dilution method was used for determining the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentrations (MBC).Results:The MICs for Kin gingival, Behsa and Boht mouthwashes were 0.14, 0.48 and 1000 micrograms/mL using the tube method for S. mutans, respectively. The MBCs for the mentioned mouthwashes were 0.23, 1.9 and 2000 micrograms/mL for S. mutans, respectively. The MICs for Kin gingival, Behsa and Boht mouthwashes were 0.073, 0.48 and 250 micrograms/mL using the tube method for S. sanguinis, respectively. The MBCs for the mentioned mouthwashes were 0.14, 1.9 and 1000 micrograms/mL for S. sanguinis, respectively.Conclusions:The Kin Gingival chlorhexidine mouthwash has a greater effect than Behsa and Boht mouthwashes on oral microorganisms and is recommended to be used for plaque chemical inhibition.

PurposeThe effects of magnetostrictive and piezoelectric devices on tooth surfaces seem to differ with regard to the root surface roughness they produce. This study aimed to compare the results of scaling using magnetostrictive and piezoelectric devices on extracted teeth.MethodsForty-four human extracted teeth were assigned to four study groups (n=11). In two groups (C100 and C200), the teeth were scaled using a magnetostrictive device and two different lateral forces: 100 g and 200 g, respectively. In the other two groups (P100 and P200), the teeth were scaled with a piezoelectric device with 100 g and 200 g of lateral force, respectively. he teeth were scaled and the data on the duration of scaling and the amount of surface were collected and analyzed using the t-test.ResultsThe mean time needed for instrumentation for the piezoelectric and magnetostrictive devices was 50:54 and 41:10, respectively, but their difference was not statistically significant (P=0.171). For root surface roughness, we only found a statistically significantly poorer result for the C200 group in comparison to the P200 group (P=0.033).ConclusionsThis study revealed that applying a piezoelectric scaler with 200 g of lateral force leaves smoother surfaces than a magnetostrictive device with the same lateral force.

Context:Periodontitis is a chronic infectious disease that leads to inflammation of the tissues supporting the teeth, bone loss, attachment loss progressively. In chronic periodontitis for starting the host response and inflammatory reaction, the presence of the infectious agent is necessary.Aims:One of inflammatory factors is tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) that appear to be important in the destruction of periodontal tissues that were examined in this study.Materials and Methods:This study was performed in the laboratory and case-control study. The samples of study collected from 30 individuals with chronic periodontitis and 30 healthy controls that matched for age and sex, together. Unstimulated saliva samples were collected from patients and then TNF-α level were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and were compared with the control group.Statistical Analysis Used:In this study for statistical analysis, Mann-Whitney was used.Results:There were differences in mean salivary concentrations of TNF-α in controls and patients. The average concentration in the case group was 9.1 (pg/ml) and the control group was 8.7 (pg/ml), but there was no significant difference between case and control groups (P > 0.05).Conclusions:The results of this analysis showed no significant relationship between two groups TNF-α concentration. This biomarker can not seem to be a good index to evaluate or predict periodontal disease.

Background and aims: The replacement of teeth with osseointegrated implants is one of the signi cant advances in the eld of restorative dentistry. The time interval between tooth extraction and the implant can be very short or long. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to collect and evaluate articles related to determining the effect of immediate loading of dental implants are placed in the fresh socket initial stability on the clinical success of the implant compared to delay loading procedure.Materials and Methods: In this study, all the available articles indexed in leading databases, including PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Embase, PsycINFO, PROSPERO, and Scopus were searched. The full text of the articles meeting the primary criteria to be included in this research was obtained and appraised. Data of studies were extracted if they were scored as a high or moderate level of evidence.Results: A total of 2,258 published articles were found through electronic database searching. After screening the titles and abstracts, and full-text of articles 16 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The results of this study revealed that regarding the success rate, although there was no signi cant difference between immediate and delay loading of dental implants, immediate procedure showed a lower incidence of bone loss in single implants. Conclusion:Based on the results of this study, immediate loading of dental implant, under certain conditions, is a successful treatment process and is effective in reducing treatment time. Thus, immediate loading represents a valid alternative to the traditional delayed loading rehabilitation.

No abstract