Dentifrícios com diferentes composições estão disponíveis no mercado, mas existe pouca informação sobre suas propriedades. O objetivo do presente estudo “in vitro” foi avaliar as características físico-químicas de 12 dentifrícios divididos em 3 categorias, como contendo: agentes dessensibilizantes, triclosan ou agentes clareadores. Perda por dessecação/análise de resíduos: 5 g do dentifrício foi pesado cinco vezes para cada grupo. Análise do pH: foram diluídos 5 g do dentifrício suspensos em três partes de água destilada e analisados usando um potenciômetro digital. Microscopia eletrônica de varredura (MEV): análise das cinzas, forma e tamanho de partículas dos agentes abrasivos. Espectroscopia de raios X por dispersão em energia (EDX): identificação dos elementos abrasivos. Análise dos dados: Os dados foram analisados usando ANOVA e teste pos-hoc Bonferroni (α=0,05). Perda por dessecação: 38,21% à 65,83%. Os dentifrícios contendo triclosan e agentes dessensibilizantes mostraram diferença significante entre eles (p<0,05). Dentifrícios clareadores mostraram diferença significante entre Close-Up Whitening e Sensodyne Branqueador (44,72% e 65,83%, respectivamente). A maioria dos dentifrícios apresentaram pH básico ou neutro. Diferentes formas e tamanhos das partículas foram observadas na análise em MEV. Elementos abrasivos foram identificados no EDX. Estes resultados demonstram que os dentifrícios avaliados apresentaram diferentes propriedades e que suas composições influenciam diretamente em características, resultando em ações mais ou menos abrasivas sobre a superfície do dente. O conhecimento sobre as características dos dentifrícios é importante para indicar o produto ideal para cada caso.

Dentifrices with different compositions are available on the market, but there is limited information about their properties. The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the physicochemical characteristics of 12 dentifrices divided into three categories, as containing desensitizing agents, Triclosan or whitening agents. Desiccation loss/residue analysis: 5 g of dentifrice was weighed five times for each group. pH analysis: 5 g of dentifrice were diluted in three parts of distilled water and analyzed using a digital potentiometer. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM): analysis of ashes, shape and size of the particles. Energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDX): identification of the abrasive elements. Data were analyzed using ANOVA, Bonferroni post hoc test (α=0.05). Desiccation loss: 38.21% to 65.83%. Dentifrices containing Triclosan and desensitizing agents showed statistically significant differences among them (p<0.05). Whitening dentifrices showed statistically significant differences between Close-Up Whitening and Sensodyne Branqueador (44.72%, 65.83%, respectively). Most dentifrices presented neutral or basic pH. Different shape and size particles were observed in the SEM analysis. Abrasive elements were identified in the EDX. These results demonstrate that the evaluated dentifrices had different properties and their composition influences directly their characteristics, thus resulting in a more or less abrasive action on tooth surface. Knowing the characteristics of the dentifrices is important to indicate the ideal product for each case.

This study evaluated the fracture resistance of teeth submitted to internal bleaching and restored with different non-metallic post. Eighty mandibular incisors were endodontically treated and randomly divided in 10 groups (n = 8): G1- restored with composite resin (CR), G2- CR + fiber-reinforced composite post (FRC, Everstick post, Sticktech) cemented with resin cement self-etch adhesive (RCS, Panavia F 2.0, Kuraray), G3- CR + FRC + self-adhesive resin cement (SRC, Breeze, Pentral Clinical), G4- CR+ glass fiber post (GF, Exacto Post, Angelus) + RCS, G5- CR + GF + SRC. The G6 to G10 were bleached with hydrogen peroxide (HP) and restored with the same restorative procedures used for G1 to G5, respectively. After 7 days storage in artificial saliva, the specimens were submitted to the compressive strength test (N) at 0.5 mm/min cross-head speed and the failure pattern was identified as either reparable (failure showed until 2 mm below the cement-enamel junction) or irreparable (the failure showed <2 mm or more below the cement-enamel). Data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey test (α = 0.05). No significant difference (p < 0.05) was found among G1 to G10. The results suggest that intracoronal bleaching did not significantly weaken the teeth and the failure patterns were predominately reparable for all groups. The non-metallic posts in these teeth did not improve fracture resistance.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the bond strength of fiber post previously laser treated root canals. Forty single-rooted bovine teeth were endodontically treated, randomly and equally divided into two main groups according to the type of pretreatment: G1: 2.5% NaOCl (control group); and G2: Er,Cr:YSGG laser. Each group was further subdivided into 2 groups based on the category of adhesive systems/ luting materials used: a: an etch-and-rinse resin cement (Single Bond/RelyX ARC; 3M ESPE), and b: a self-adhesive resin cement (Rely X Unicem; 3M ESPE). Three 1.5 mm thick slabs were obtained per root and the push-out test was performed at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min until post dislodgement occurred. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey's test at a pre-set alpha of 0.05. Analysis of variance showed no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) among the groups G1a (25.44 ± 2.35) and G1b (23.62 ± 3.48), G2a (11.77 ± 2.67) and G2b (9.93 ± 3.37). Fractures were observed at the interface between the dentin and the resin in all groups. The Er,Cr:YSGG laser irradiation did not influence on the bond strength of the resin cements and the etch-and-rinse resin cement had better results on bond strength than self-adhesive resin cement.