Caracterização do pino intra radicular estético após o polimento

RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar os pinos de fibra de vidro, por meio de imagens de microscopia digital, utilizando diferentes tipos de polimento. Métodos: foram utilizados cinco corpos de prova da marca FGM, com pino número 1(um), cada pino foi polido por um grupo específico. Grupo 1: Grupo controle, Grupo 2: Polimento utilizando escova de carbeto de silício, Grupo 3: Polimento utilizando disco de lixa da cor escura para cor mais clara, Grupo 4: Polimento utilizando ponta abrasiva de silicone optimize/ pontas de borracha, Grupo 5: Sequência de polimento utilizando escova de carbeto de silício, disco de lixa da cor escura para a cor mais clara e pontas de borracha. Após o polimento foi visualizado as amostras no microscópio trinocular Nikon MOD.E-100(Laborana, SP, Brazil) e identificado a superfície topográfica de cada pino. Resultados: O grupo um, grupo controle, não foi realizado nenhum polimento. O grupo dois, escova de carbeto de silicio, mostrou maior homogeneidade. O grupo três, discos de lixa, observou grande remoção da estrutura orgãnica do pino. No grupo quatro, pontas de borracha, houve homogenidade porém maior desgaste e no grupo cinco, que é a sequência de polimento houve grande remoção da parte orgânica do pino. Conclusões: Nesse estudo podemos concluir que a utilização da escova de carbeto de silício com polimento obteve melhores resultados em termos de homogeneidade de superfície do pin

Microscopia digital das pontas diamantadas para acabamento dos pinos intra radiculares pré-fabricados estéticos

Objetivo: O objetivo deste trabalho foi a avaliação por meio de imagens de microscopia digital utilizando diferentes tipos de acabamento. Métodos: Neste trabalho foram utilizados pinos de fibra de vidro de tamanho n.1, foram realizados acabamento com a seguintes pontas diamantadas: 3195, 3195F e 3195FF, formando um total de 4 grupos sendo grupo controle e os outros 3 pertencente a cada ponta diamantada respectivamente. Posteriormente foi analisado em Microscópio se houve alguma alteração em sua estrutura superficial. Resultados: No primeiro grupo foram realizados acabamentos com a ponta diamantada 3195F, apresentando então menor preservação da estrutura superficial do pino. No segundo grupo foram realizados acabamentos com a ponta diamantada 3195FF, apresentando assim variação quanto a preservação da estrutura superficial do pino. No terceiro grupo foram realizados acabamentos com a ponta diamantada 3195, obtendo assim melhor preservação da estrutura superficial do pino. Já o quarto grupo foi utilizado como grupo controle. Conclusão: A utilização da ponta diamantada 3195 apresentou maior padrão de homogeneidade e preservação da estrutura do material

A higiene bucal de bebês edêntulos e sua influência na microbiota bucal: os profissionais de saúde devem preconizá-la? – revisão crítica

Introduction: The indication of oral hygiene in edentulous babies is still controversial among health professionals, being necessary the search of this recommendation and the standardization of information. Objective: To investigate critically the evidence related to the indication of oral hygiene for edentulous babies. Methods: The search for articles was performed in the PUBMED, LILACS and GOOGLE SCHOLAR databases, in order to assess the following question: "Can oral cavity hygiene of edentulous babies influence oral microbiota? A search in 8 books of Pediatric Dentistry was also performed. Results: 317 articles were found (167-PUBMED, 146-GOOGLE SCHOLAR and 4-LILACS). There were no primary studies that evaluated the effect of oral hygiene of edentulous infants on microbiota, which impair the conduction of a systematic review. Thus, it was included for this review six studies that investigated microorganisms in the oral cavity of edentulous infants and the role of salivary immunoglobulins. Among the textbooks evaluated, only 4 indicated the oral hygiene in edentulous infants. Conclusion: According to the data, there are no primary studies that assessed the effect of oral hygiene in the oral microbiota of edentulous babies. It is relevant to conduct clinical studies in order to obtain scientific evidence about the indication or no of the oral hygiene in edentulous babies.Introdução: A indicação de higiene bucal em bebês edêntulos entre os profissionais de saúde ainda é controversa, sendo necessária a busca científica sobre esta indicação e a padronização da informação. Objetivo: Investigar criticamente as evidências relacionadas a indicação da higiene bucal para bebês edêntulos. Métodos: A busca de artigos foi realizada nas bases de dados PUBMED, LILACS e GOOGLE SCHOLAR, de modo a avaliar a seguinte pergunta: “A higienização da cavidade bucal de bebês edêntulos pode influenciar a microbiota bucal?”. Uma busca em 8 livros de Odontopediatria também foi realizada. Resultados: Foram encontrados 317 artigos (167-PUBMED, 146-GOOGLE SCHOLAR e 4-LILACS). Não foram encontrados estudos primários que avaliaram o efeito da higiene bucal em bebês edêntulos na microbiota, impossibilitando a condução de revisão sistemática. Assim, para a revisão foram incluídos 6 estudos que investigaram micro-organismos na cavidade bucal de bebês edêntulos e o papel das imunoglobulinas salivares. Dentre os livros avaliados, somente 4 indicaram a higiene bucal em bebês edêntulos. Conclusão: Diante dos dados analisados, não existem estudos primários que avaliaram o efeito da higienização na microbiota bucal de bebês edêntulos. Torna-se relevante a condução de estudos clínicos para obtenção de evidências científicas sobre a indicação ou não da higienização da cavidade bucal de bebês edêntulos

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

A higiene bucal de bebês edêntulos e sua influência na microbiota bucal: os profissionais de saúde devem preconizá-la? – revisão crítica

Introduction: The indication of oral hygiene in edentulous babies is still controversial among health professionals, being necessary the search of this recommendation and the standardization of information. Objective: To investigate critically the evidence related to the indication of oral hygiene for edentulous babies. Methods: The search for articles was performed in the PUBMED, LILACS and GOOGLE SCHOLAR databases, in order to assess the following question: "Can oral cavity hygiene of edentulous babies influence oral microbiota? A search in 8 books of Pediatric Dentistry was also performed. Results: 317 articles were found (167-PUBMED, 146-GOOGLE SCHOLAR and 4-LILACS). There were no primary studies that evaluated the effect of oral hygiene of edentulous infants on microbiota, which impair the conduction of a systematic review. Thus, it was included for this review six studies that investigated microorganisms in the oral cavity of edentulous infants and the role of salivary immunoglobulins. Among the textbooks evaluated, only 4 indicated the oral hygiene in edentulous infants. Conclusion: According to the data, there are no primary studies that assessed the effect of oral hygiene in the oral microbiota of edentulous babies. It is relevant to conduct clinical studies in order to obtain scientific evidence about the indication or no of the oral hygiene in edentulous babies.Introdução: A indicação de higiene bucal em bebês edêntulos entre os profissionais de saúde ainda é controversa, sendo necessária a busca científica sobre esta indicação e a padronização da informação. Objetivo: Investigar criticamente as evidências relacionadas a indicação da higiene bucal para bebês edêntulos. Métodos: A busca de artigos foi realizada nas bases de dados PUBMED, LILACS e GOOGLE SCHOLAR, de modo a avaliar a seguinte pergunta: “A higienização da cavidade bucal de bebês edêntulos pode influenciar a microbiota bucal?”. Uma busca em 8 livros de Odontopediatria também foi realizada. Resultados: Foram encontrados 317 artigos (167-PUBMED, 146-GOOGLE SCHOLAR e 4-LILACS). Não foram encontrados estudos primários que avaliaram o efeito da higiene bucal em bebês edêntulos na microbiota, impossibilitando a condução de revisão sistemática. Assim, para a revisão foram incluídos 6 estudos que investigaram micro-organismos na cavidade bucal de bebês edêntulos e o papel das imunoglobulinas salivares. Dentre os livros avaliados, somente 4 indicaram a higiene bucal em bebês edêntulos. Conclusão: Diante dos dados analisados, não existem estudos primários que avaliaram o efeito da higienização na microbiota bucal de bebês edêntulos. Torna-se relevante a condução de estudos clínicos para obtenção de evidências científicas sobre a indicação ou não da higienização da cavidade bucal de bebês edêntulos

A Bayesian reanalysis of the Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial

Background Timing of initiation of kidney-replacement therapy (KRT) in critically ill patients remains controversial. The Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial compared two strategies of KRT initiation (accelerated versus standard) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and found neutral results for 90-day all-cause mortality. Probabilistic exploration of the trial endpoints may enable greater understanding of the trial findings. We aimed to perform a reanalysis using a Bayesian framework. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of all 2927 patients randomized in multi-national STARRT-AKI trial, performed at 168 centers in 15 countries. The primary endpoint, 90-day all-cause mortality, was evaluated using hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression. A spectrum of priors includes optimistic, neutral, and pessimistic priors, along with priors informed from earlier clinical trials. Secondary endpoints (KRT-free days and hospital-free days) were assessed using zero–one inflated beta regression. Results The posterior probability of benefit comparing an accelerated versus a standard KRT initiation strategy for the primary endpoint suggested no important difference, regardless of the prior used (absolute difference of 0.13% [95% credible interval [CrI] − 3.30%; 3.40%], − 0.39% [95% CrI − 3.46%; 3.00%], and 0.64% [95% CrI − 2.53%; 3.88%] for neutral, optimistic, and pessimistic priors, respectively). There was a very low probability that the effect size was equal or larger than a consensus-defined minimal clinically important difference. Patients allocated to the accelerated strategy had a lower number of KRT-free days (median absolute difference of − 3.55 days [95% CrI − 6.38; − 0.48]), with a probability that the accelerated strategy was associated with more KRT-free days of 0.008. Hospital-free days were similar between strategies, with the accelerated strategy having a median absolute difference of 0.48 more hospital-free days (95% CrI − 1.87; 2.72) compared with the standard strategy and the probability that the accelerated strategy had more hospital-free days was 0.66. Conclusions In a Bayesian reanalysis of the STARRT-AKI trial, we found very low probability that an accelerated strategy has clinically important benefits compared with the standard strategy. Patients receiving the accelerated strategy probably have fewer days alive and KRT-free. These findings do not support the adoption of an accelerated strategy of KRT initiation

Initiation of continuous renal replacement therapy versus intermittent hemodialysis in critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury: a secondary analysis of STARRT-AKI trial

Background: There is controversy regarding the optimal renal-replacement therapy (RRT) modality for critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI). Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of the STandard versus Accelerated Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial to compare outcomes among patients who initiated RRT with either continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) or intermittent hemodialysis (IHD). We generated a propensity score for the likelihood of receiving CRRT and used inverse probability of treatment with overlap-weighting to address baseline inter-group differences. The primary outcome was a composite of death or RRT dependence at 90-days after randomization. Results: We identified 1590 trial participants who initially received CRRT and 606 who initially received IHD. The composite outcome of death or RRT dependence at 90-days occurred in 823 (51.8%) patients who commenced CRRT and 329 (54.3%) patients who commenced IHD (unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-1.09). After balancing baseline characteristics with overlap weighting, initial receipt of CRRT was associated with a lower risk of death or RRT dependence at 90-days compared with initial receipt of IHD (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.66-0.99). This association was predominantly driven by a lower risk of RRT dependence at 90-days (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.39-0.94). Conclusions: In critically ill patients with severe AKI, initiation of CRRT, as compared to IHD, was associated with a significant reduction in the composite outcome of death or RRT dependence at 90-days