Alexandre Antonio Ribeiro

Efetividade dos aparelhos intrabucais de avanço mandibular no tratamento do ronco e da síndrome da apneia e hipopneia obstrutiva do sono (SAHOS): revisão sistemática

INTRODUCAO: o ronco e produzido pela vibracao do palato mole e/ou outros tecidos bucofaringeos, durante a passagem do ar, na funcao respiratoria. A SAHOS e definida como o fechamento de 30%, no minimo, da via aerea nasal/bucal por 10 segundos ou mais, apesar de existir esforco ventilatorio, acompanhado de dessaturacao da oxi-hemoglobina de 4% ou mais. OBJETIVO: avaliar a evidencia cientifica disponivel sobre a utilizacao de aparelhos intrabucais de avanco mandibular no tratamento do ronco e da SAHOS. METODOS: uma estrategia de busca eletronica utilizando palavras-chaves e criterios predefinidos foi realizada incluindo trabalhos publicados ate outubro de 2008. Foi tambem utilizada a avaliacao qualitativa da metodologia dos artigos. RESULTADOS: embora um significativo numero de estudos tenha analisado o assunto, apenas 7 artigos apresentaram qualidade metodologica para serem incluidos nesta revisao sistematica. CONCLUSOES: os aparelhos intrabucais de avanco mandibular estao amplamente indicados para o tratamento do ronco e da SAHOS como terapia principal, ou alternativa naqueles pacientes que nao podem suportar a terapia da pressao positiva das vias aereas.

Assessing adhesive remnant removal and enamel damage with ultraviolet light: An in-vitro study

Introduction: Our objective was to assess the amounts of adhesive remnant and enamel damage when removing composite under conventional lighting and ultraviolet (UV) light. Methods: Thirty‐eight premolars were divided into 2 groups according to the lighting used for adhesive removal. A multifluted tungsten‐carbide bur at low speed was used for this process in both groups. The UV group received conventional lighting associated with UV light, and the conventional group received conventional lighting only. The amounts of adhesive remnant were calculated using images of the teeth taken under UV light with software. Scanning electron microscopy images of epoxy adhesive replicas of the teeth made before bonding and after adhesive removal were graded according to the enamel damage index (EDI), and the difference between the final and initial EDI scores was used for assessment of the enamel damage. To detect differences between the groups, the Mann‐Whitney test was used to analyze the data from the adhesive remnant index and the EDI. Results: The conventional group had more adhesive left on the enamel (P <0.001) than did the UV group. There was no difference between groups for the EDI (P = 0.729). Conclusions: UV lighting allows significantly more adhesive removal without increasing the damage caused to the enamel. HighlightsThe use of UV light to assist the resin removal procedure was tested.With UV light, more resin is removed from enamel surfaces.The use of UV light did not cause more damage to enamel.