“
“International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry 2010; 20: 179–185 Objectives.  This study examined caries level, amount of calculus, and oral microbial environment in gastrostomy tube (GT)-fed children compared with healthy children and children with disabilities orally fed (PO). Study design.  The study group Dabrafenib datasheet consisted of 12 GT-fed children and the two control groups consisted of 16 children with disabilities orally fed and 17 healthy children. DMF-T/dmf-t index, calculus index, Mutans Streptococci (MS), Lactobacilli (LB) levels and salivary buffer capacity were

examined. Results.  DMF-T/dmf-t index was significantly lower in the tube-fed group. Calculus index was highest in the tube-fed group. MS and LB levels were the lowest in the tube-fed children. Correlation was found between MS and DMF-T/dmf-t. Conclusions.  Tube-fed children demonstrated significantly higher calculus levels and less caries, MS, and LB levels then healthy

children or children with disabilities eating PO. “
“Laboratory studies show diverse behaviour of different brands of glass–ionomer cements (GIC). This study investigated the clinical performance [survival rate (SR)] of three GIC brands applied to proximal atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations. Additionally, the SR of the tooth was evaluated. Proximal cavities of 262 primary molars were restored. The patients had been randomly selleckchem allocated to two operators and three GIC brands: Fuji IX, Hi-Dense, and Maxxion R. Restorations were evaluated after 1, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months. Thymidine kinase Failed restorations were, if possible, repaired or replaced. Linear regression analyses were used to evaluate the effect of GIC brand, operator, and surface of restoration. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and log-rank test were performed for both restoration survival and tooth survival (α = 5%). After 3 years, 82.4% of the restorations were evaluated. The SR of the restorations was 24.4%, and there

was no difference among GIC brands (log-rank test, P = 0.6). In the first 18 months, a significant operator effect and significantly higher failures in distal surfaces were found. The SR of the tooth was 81.7%. The SR of proximal ART restorations was relatively low when compared with the SR of the tooth. There are no differences in the performance among the GIC brands used in the study. “
“Evidence on caries risk assessment (CRA) and recall intervals are limited in terms of caries prevention. To assess the effectiveness of a program on the incidence and regression of initial caries lesions. A total of 296 children aged 1–12 years old were assessed by calibrated examiners for Gingival Bleeding Index, Dental Plaque Index, dmf-t/DMF-T Index, initial caries lesions, and caries lesion activity. Children were classified as low, moderate, and high caries risk with different recall interval visits. Statistical analysis included Cox regression and Kaplan–Meier curves.