Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Bart Vande Vannet

Publications and source records attributed to Bart Vande Vannet.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

Toxicity of used orthodontic archwires assessed by three-dimensional cell culture.

The aim of the present study was to determine whether used orthodontic wires made of different materials cause toxicity and loss of viability on three-dimensional (3D) cell cultures. Three types of orthodontic wires, stainless steel, Nitinol, and TMA (n = 9) which had been used clinically in fixed appliances for a period of 1 month, were retrieved at random from five patients. Both upper and lower archwires were collected and subjected to two different protocols: to assess toxicity, two pieces of each wire were placed on 3D cell cultures (reconstituted human epithelium); to investigate the possibility of cell damage, the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)2,5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay was used and haematoxylin and eosin staining was performed to evaluate morphological changes. Copper wire served as the control to determine the morphology of severe toxicity, and native cell cultures and silk were used as the negative controls. Morphological evaluation of the native cell cultures revealed no toxic reactions. The ranking, from mild to severe toxicity was as follows: stainless steel < Nitinol = TMA. There were no significant differences between TMA and Nitinol. The MTT assay revealed the following mean percentage values for viability: native cell line (negative control), 100; stainless steel, 102.25; TMA, 87.4; Nitinol, 85.3; and copper wire (positive control) 57.2. Histological evaluation of the 3D cell cultures showed no severe toxicity or loss of viability for any of the wires. However, relative comparison between the different wires revealed that stainless steel induced less toxicity/loss of viability compared with TMA and Nitinol wire.

Adolescent↗

Influence of a soft drink with low pH on enamel surfaces: an in vitro study.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to investigate, in vitro, the short-term effect of a soft drink (Coca Cola, Coca Cola Company, Atlanta, Ga) with low pH on enamel surfaces at different levels of intake. Effects on labial and palatal surfaces were also compared. METHODS: Thirty human enamel blocks (labial and palatal enamel surfaces) were randomly divided into 5 groups-1 control and 4 experimental. For 7 days, the enamel surfaces in the experimental groups were immersed in Coca-Cola at different frequencies: 1, 2, or 3 times per day for 20 minutes each, with each immersion followed by 1 hour in artificial saliva. Specimens in the fourth group were immersed for 1 minute in the soft drink followed by 3 minutes in artificial saliva, and the cycle repeated for 20 minutes to better simulate drinking habits. Control specimens remained in physiological serum at room temperature. The measurements were made at baseline (T0), day 3 (T1), and day 7 (T2) with a Knoop hardness tester. Analysis of the variance was used to find differences between the groups. For the multiple comparisons, the Dunnett test was used. The statistical level was accepted at P < .05. RESULTS: The experimental groups showed significant reductions in microhardness values. Differences between the test groups were not statistically significant, nor were differences between the labial and the palatal surfaces. CONCLUSIONS: Soft drink intake, even of relatively short duration, can reduce enamel microhardness. The frequency of intake seems not to play a decisive role on enamel microhardness. Care should be taken to avoid soft drinks during orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances.

Analysis of Variance↗

Root repair after injury from mini-screw.

Mini-implants and mini-screws are commonly used in orthodontics to provide extra anchorage. One potential insertion site is between the roots in the alveolar process, which results in a risk of damaging the roots of neighbouring teeth. In an animal-experimental study, 20 mini-screws (bracket screw bone anchors, BSBAs) were inserted into the mandible of five beagle dogs. Each dog received two BSBAs in each lower quadrant, between the roots of the second and third, and third and fourth premolars. Sequential point labelling was performed every 6 weeks with vital stains, and apical X-rays were taken every 6 weeks. Radiographic examination demonstrated damage at three roots because of insertion of the BSBAs. Histological examination at these three roots demonstrated an almost complete repair of the periodontal structure (e.g. cementum, periodontal ligament and bone) in a period of 12 weeks, following removal of the screws.

Animals↗

[Low viscosity composites as materials for orthodontic bonding].

A new type of composite materials, referred to as low viscosity composites, has been introduced onto the dental market. Little has been published yet concerning the biological and mechanical properties of these new materials, and the practitioner has to rely on the information, provided by the manufacturer. The low viscosity composites are hybrid composites, with a decreased amount of filler particles. This results in a lower viscosity, which makes these materials more appropriate in certain situations. Since the filler loading of these materials is decreased, one could expect inferior mechanical properties, compared to the conventional and hybrid composites. Therefore, the indications for using low viscosity composites are limited. In this article we propose to use low viscosity composites for the bonding of lingual retainers and implant-borne transpalatal arches. The explicit feature of flow, is very attractive for these indications, because a minimum of finishing is needed, when a low viscosity composite is used in these situations. Since there is no direct occlusal bite force put on the composite, the fact that the mechanical properties of a low viscosity composite could be inferior to those of a conventional composite, can be disregarded. A protocol for fixing lingual retainers and implant-borne transpalatal arches is proposed in the article, with other tips, concerning the fabrication of the retainers themselves.

Composite Resins↗