Objective  This study aimed to evaluate the influence of new complete dentures (CDs) and new removable partial dentures (RPDs) on oral health-related quality of life, dry mouth sensation, and anxiety level of their wearers. Materials and Methods  In total, 20 complete edentulous patients (in both arches) that needed to be rehabilitated with new CDs, and 20 partial edentulous patients (in both arches) that needed to be rehabilitated with new RPDs, were included in this study. Each patient must wear the same pair of CDs or RPDs for more than 5 years. Oral health-related quality of life, dry mouth sensation, and level of anxiety were assessed by using the following questionnaires: Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI), VAS (Visual Analog Scale) Xerostomia Questionnaire, and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). These questionnaires were applied before oral rehabilitation (initially initial time point) and 3 months after insertion of new dentures (end time point). Statistical Analysis  For the results of STAI-State, STAI-Trait, and GOHAI, the Wilcoxon test was applied to compare the time points. For the results of the VAS xerostomia questionnaire, two-way repeated measures ANOVA (analysis of variance) was applied, followed by the Tukey test. The p -values lower than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results / Conclusion  For both groups, it was observed that 3 months after the insertion of new removable dentures: (1) there was an increase in oral health-related quality of life; (2) there was a reduction in anxiety (trait anxiety and state anxiety); and (3) there was a perception of greater salivation.

Objective: The aim of this study is to verify whether removable dentures of patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) are niches of microorganisms that can cause pathologies (Staphylococcus aureus, Candida spp., and enterobacteria). Materials and Methods: Fifteen patients who were denture wearers (removable partial denture and complete denture) were included in this study. Patients must wear their dentures daily, and these dentures must have acrylic parts. Microbial biofilm was collected from the acrylic part of one denture of each patient. Then, the biofilm was seeded on different culture media: Sabouraud agar, blood agar, MacConkey agar, and mannitol salt agar. In this study, biochemical evaluations of microorganisms were performed. Statistical analysis: The percentage of dentures with the microorganism identified by each culture medium was calculated. Results: In total, 100% of the dentures were positive for Staphylococcus spp. (blood agar) and Candida spp. (Sabouraud agar); 33.3% of the dentures were positive for S. aureus (Mannitol salt agar); and 13.3% of the dentures were positive for Shigella spp. (MacConkey agar). Conclusion: Removable dentures of patients (removable partial dentures and complete dentures) admitted to an ICU are niches of microorganisms that can cause pathologies.

With the advances of osseointegration principles, the use of implant-supported prosthesis has become a routine treatment option. The success of an implant is initially associated to the surgical technique, primary stability and absence of bacterial contamination on the implant site. Subsequently, the absence of mechanical trauma (overload) and peri-implantitis are sine qua non conditions to the longitudinal success of implant treatment. Therefore, the strict maintenance of oral hygiene is highly important to avoid biofilm accumulation around the implant and consequently to provide last-long implant-supported dentures. The clinician has the responsibility to supply a favorable prognosis to the patient so that the rehabilitation succeed. For this reason, during prosthesis fabrication the clinician should observe the design and emergency profile of the prosthesis, the peri-implant sulcus depth as well as the presence of motor or psychological impairment by the patient. Subjects with missing teeth and that will be submitted to the implant treatment should be motivated and adequate instructed regarding oral hygiene and its importance since the best option to obtain treatment longevity and consequently patient’s satisfaction is the prevention. Therefore, this study aimed to perform a literature review about the hygiene of implant-supported prosthesis.

SARS-CoV-2 (or 2019-nCoV) is the novel Coronavirus that affects humans. It originated in China at the end of 2019 due to the consumption of animals contaminated with this pathogen. SARS-CoV-2 causes the disease known as COVID-19 (coronavirus disease - 2019), and until May 21, 2020, approximately 213 countries and territories had been affected by SARS-CoV-2. The objective of this study was to review the origin and characteristics of this virus (SARS-CoV-2), symptoms and diagnosis of COVID-19, treatment of people with COVID-19, forms of transmission of the SARS-CoV-2, and precautions in dentistry. A literature search on PubMed/Medline was performed on the May 21, 2020, using the keywords (Mesh terms) COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 or Coronavirus associated with dentistry or dental care or oral medicine. SARS-CoV-2 articles about the origin and characteristics of this virus (SARS-CoV-2), symptoms and diagnosis of COVID-19, treatment of people with COVID-19, forms of transmission of the SARS-CoV-2, and precautions in dentistry were included. The search was expanded according to necessity. Articles related to precautions in dentistry and SARS-CoV-1 or MERS-CoV were also selected, since precautions used in the dental clinic to avoid these viruses also apply to SARS-CoV-2. In addition, the references cited in the publications of articles included were also considered when appropriate. There was no limit in relation to the year of publication, and only articles written in English were included. In this study, suggestions for the safety of dental professionals were also included. Forty-seven articles and nine websites were included in this review.

This review presents a classification system for maxillofacial prostheses, while explaining its types. It also aims to describe their origin and development, currently available materials, and techniques, predicts the future requirements, and subsequently discusses its avenues for improvement as a restorative modality. A literature search of the PubMed/Medline database was performed. Articles that discussed the history, types, materials, fabrication techniques, clinical implications, and future expectations related to maxillofacial prostheses and reconstruction were included. Fifty-nine articles were included in this review. Maxillofacial prostheses were classified as restorative or complementary with subclassifications based on the prostheses finality. The origin of maxillofacial prostheses is unclear; however, fabrication techniques and materials have undergone several changes throughout history. Currently, silicones and acrylic resins are the most commonly used materials to fabricate customized prostheses. Maxillofacial prostheses not only restore several types of orofacial defects but also improve the patients' quality of life. Although the current clinical scenario concerning the field of maxillofacial prostheses is promising, improvements in material quality and techniques for maxillofacial prostheses may be expected in the future, to produce better results in the treatment of patients.

The development of implant dentistry improved the possibilities of rehabilitation with maxillofacial prosthesis. However, clinically it is difficult to bond the silicone to the attachment system. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an adhesive system on the bond strength between acrylic resin and facial silicone. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 120 samples were fabricated with auto-polymerized acrylic resin and MDX 4-4210 facial silicone. Both materials were bonded through mechanical retentions and/or application of primers (DC 1205 primer and Sofreliner primer S) and adhesive (Silastic Medical Adhesive Type A) or not (control group). Samples were divided into 12 groups according to the method used to attach the silicone to the acrylic resin. All samples were subjected to a T-peel test in a universal testing machine. Failures were classified as adhesive, cohesive or mixed. The data were evaluated by the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey's HSD test (α=.05). RESULTS: The highest bond strength values (5.95 N/mm; 3.07 N/mm; 4.75 N/mm) were recorded for the samples that received a Sofreliner primer application. These values were significantly higher when the samples had no scratches and did not receive the application of Silastic Medical Adhesive Type A. CONCLUSIONS: The most common type of failure was adhesive. The use of Sofreliner primer increased the bond strength between the auto-polymerized acrylic resin and the Silastic MDX 4-4210 facial silicone.

The development of implant dentistry improved the possibilities of rehabilitation with maxillofacial prosthesis. However, clinically it is difficult to bond the silicone to the attachment system. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an adhesive system on the bond strength between acrylic resin and facial silicone. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 120 samples were fabricated with auto-polymerized acrylic resin and MDX 4-4210 facial silicone. Both materials were bonded through mechanical retentions and/or application of primers (DC 1205 primer and Sofreliner primer S) and adhesive (Silastic Medical Adhesive Type A) or not (control group). Samples were divided into 12 groups according to the method used to attach the silicone to the acrylic resin. All samples were subjected to a T-peel test in a universal testing machine. Failures were classified as adhesive, cohesive or mixed. The data were evaluated by the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey's HSD test (α=.05). RESULTS: The highest bond strength values (5.95 N/mm; 3.07 N/mm; 4.75 N/mm) were recorded for the samples that received a Sofreliner primer application. These values were significantly higher when the samples had no scratches and did not receive the application of Silastic Medical Adhesive Type A. CONCLUSIONS: The most common type of failure was adhesive. The use of Sofreliner primer increased the bond strength between the auto-polymerized acrylic resin and the Silastic MDX 4-4210 facial silicone.

The development of implant dentistry improved the possibilities of rehabilitation with maxillofacial prosthesis. However, clinically it is difficult to bond the silicone to the attachment system. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of an adhesive system on the bond strength between acrylic resin and facial silicone. Material and Methods: A total of 120 samples were fabricated with auto-polymerized acrylic resin and MDX 4-4210 facial silicone. Both materials were bonded through mechanical retentions and/or application of primers (DC 1205 primer and Sofreliner primer S) and adhesive (Silastic Medical Adhesive Type A) or not (control group). Samples were divided into 12 groups according to the method used to attach the silicone to the acrylic resin. All samples were subjected to a T-peel test in a universal testing machine. Failures were classified as adhesive, cohesive or mixed. The data were evaluated by the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey's HSD test (α=.05). Results: The highest bond strength values (5.95 N/mm; 3.07 N/mm; 4.75 N/mm) were recorded for the samples that received a Sofreliner primer application. These values were significantly higher when the samples had no scratches and did not receive the application of Silastic Medical Adhesive Type A. Conclusions: The most common type of failure was adhesive. The use of Sofreliner primer increased the bond strength between the auto-polymerized acrylic resin and the Silastic MDX 4-4210 facial silicone.