Determination of the effective anticandidal concentration of denture cleanser tablets on some denture base resins

<div><p>Abstract Objective Although the effectiveness of chemical cleansing against Candida albicans biofilm has been shown, the effective concentration of denture cleanser tablets has not been studied. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of three denture materials against Candida albicans biofilm and to determine effective concentrations of denture cleanser tablets. Material and methods The surface-roughness of Acron-hi™, QC-20™ and Deflex™ (n=45 per resin) resins was standardized by using a profilometer and their contact angle or surface free energy was calculated. C. albicans biofilm was formed on all three resins and were treated with Polident 3 min™, Corega™ and Fittydent™ cleanser solutions at various concentrations and both resin-biofilm and cleanser-biofilm interest were determined by using a MTT protocol according to the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing's antifungal susceptibility testing (AFST-EUCAST). Scanning electron microscopy was used to compare the efficacy of different resin materials against C. albicans biofilm. Anticandidal activity and surface free energy statistical parameters were calculated by using 3-way and 1-way ANOVA, respectively (p<0.05). Results Polident 3 min™ and Corega™ tablets significantly inhibited (p<0.05) the proliferation of C. albicans against all denture resins at 27-37 mg/mL. Scanning electron microscopy results indicated that there was no significant difference among resin specimens regarding biofilm formation on dentures. We failed to find a significant relationship between surface free energy and the anticandidal effect of resin types. However, the polarity value of the resins was statistically associated with their anticandidal activity. Conclusions The polarity of the resins, the concentrations of tablets and the chemical content of the cleanser may directly affect C. albicans biofilm formations. Polident 3 min™ and Corega™ tablets should be suggested for patients who use any denture resin types, whereas the Fittydent™ tablet should only be proposed for those who use Deflex™, when two tablets are dropped into 150 mL water.</p></div

Impact of QTc prolongation on the occurrence of adverse events in HCM patients.

<p>Sensitivity, specificity, PPV (positive predictive value), NPV (negative predictive value) and OR (odds ratio; adjusted for age and sex) with 95%-CI (confidence intervals) are given in the table below. AE = adverse events (syncope, presyncope, VT).</p

Influence of disease related factors and medication on the QTc interval in 100 HCM patients.

<p>Values are given as total number of patients (n) or as mean ± SD.</p><p>Influence of disease related factors and medication on the QTc interval in 100 HCM patients.</p

Influence of disease related factors and medication on the orthostatic test result in 69 HCM patients older than or equal to 40 years.

<p>Values are given as total number of patients (n) or as mean ± SD.</p><p>Influence of disease related factors and medication on the orthostatic test result in 69 HCM patients older than or equal to 40 years.</p

Impact of orthostatic test on the occurrence of adverse events in HCM patients for all patients (A) and for the subgroup of patients > 40 yrs (B).

<p>Sensitivity, specificity, PPV (positive predictive value), NPV (negative predictive value) and OR (odds ratio; adjusted for age and sex) with 95%-CI (confidence intervals) are given in the table below. AE = adverse events (syncope, presyncope, VT).</p

Relationship between orthostatic test result and QTc prolongation.

<p>The percentages of patients with a positive and negative orthostatic test result are given for the group with and without QTc prolongation.</p

Coronary Sinus Lead Removal: A Comparison between Active and Passive Fixation Leads

<div><p>Background</p><p>Implantation of coronary sinus (CS) leads may be a difficult procedure due to different vein anatomies and a possible lead dislodgement. The mode of CS lead fixation has changed and developed in recent years.</p><p>Objectives</p><p>We compared the removal procedures of active and passive fixation leads.</p><p>Methods</p><p>Between January 2009 and January 2014, 22 patients at our centre underwent CS lead removal, 6 active and 16 passive fixation leads were attempted using simple traction or lead locking devices with or without laser extraction sheaths. Data on procedural variables and success rates were collected and retrospectively analyzed.</p><p>Results</p><p>The mean patient age was 67.2 ± 9.8 years, and 90.9% were male. The indication for lead removal was infection in all cases. All active fixation leads were Medtronic^® Attain StarFix^™ Model 4195 (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA). The mean time from implantation for the active and passive fixation leads was 9.9 ± 11.7 months (range 1.0–30.1) and 48.7 ± 33.6 months (range 5.7–106.4), respectively (p = 0.012). Only 3 of 6 StarFix leads were successfully removed (50%) compared to 16 of 16 (100%) of the passive fixation CS leads (p = 0.013). No death or complications occurred during the 30-day follow-up.</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>According to our experience, removal of the Starfix active fixation CS leads had a higher procedural failure rate compared to passive.</p></div

Chest-X-Ray with abandoned LV Lead fragment after extraction failure.

<p>Chest-X-Ray with abandoned LV Lead fragment after extraction failure.</p

Re-implantation status.

<p>Re-implantation status.</p