Murilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres

Dr. Murilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

8Years (2019-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2023 in Journal of Applied Oral Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MFMagda Feres
Magda Feres
MFMurilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres
Murilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres

1 December 2019 in Carbohydrate Polymers
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ELEduardo Listik
Eduardo Listik
JGJuliana Azevedo Marques Gaschler
Juliana Azevedo Marques Gaschler
MMMurilo Matias
Murilo Matias
MFMurilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres
Murilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres
LTLeny Toma
Leny Toma
ANAna Carla Raphaelli Nahás
Ana Carla Raphaelli Nahás

6 July 2023 in Journal of Dental Education
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KMKelly Fernanda Molena
Kelly Fernanda Molena
VPViviane de Oliveira Prado
Viviane de Oliveira Prado
APAlana Cândido Paulo
Alana Cândido Paulo
RDRuth Venâncio Fernandes Dantas
Ruth Venâncio Fernandes Dantas
AJAirton Curi Júnior
Airton Curi Júnior
MFMurilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres
Murilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres

1 January 2021 in Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MFMurilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres
Murilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres
FVFernanda Vicioni-Marques
Fernanda Vicioni-Marques
FRFábio Lourenço Romano
Fábio Lourenço Romano
MRMarina G. Roscoe
Marina G. Roscoe
VSVinícius Matsuzaki de Souza
Vinícius Matsuzaki de Souza
BBBruno Bueno-Silva
Bruno Bueno-Silva
Introduction: Although self-ligating brackets presumably provide better hygiene conditions, no consensus has been reached so far. Objective: Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate, in an in vitro experimental design, the adherence of Streptococcus mutans (SM) in self-ligating and conventional brackets of different manufacturers and ligature types. Methods: Four commercial brands of maxillary premolar metal brackets were tested (Abzil®; Morelli®; 3M Unitek®; and GAC®). Each one was subdivided into three groups, which varied according to the type of ligature and bracket model (metallic, elastic, and self-ligating), totalizing twelve groups, composed of six brackets each. Previously sterilized brackets were initially immersed in saliva for one hour, and subsequently washed and added in a bacterial suspension, maintained in aerobiosis for 72 hours. The adhered bacteria were then separated and quantified by colony forming units (CFU/mL) counting after 48 hours of growth. The groups were compared by Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn post-hoc tests (p< 0.05). Results: Regardless of the commercial brand, self-ligating brackets had significantly less CFU/mL. However, according to comparisons performed within each commercial brand, only Abzil® self-ligating brackets had significantly lower biofilm adhesion. Among all of the self-ligating models, GAC® brackets presented the highest bacterial adhesion rate. Conclusions: Self-ligating brackets are likely to present lower rates of biofilm adhesion. Particularly, Abzil® and GAC® self-ligating brackets are less likely to accumulate biofilm. Although such results are derived from an in vitro study, practitioners might acknowledge findings concerning bacterial adhesion as one of the relevant features to be considered during bracket selection.

22 September 2022 in Evidence-Based Dentistry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MFMurilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres
Murilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres
MAMaxwell Lopes Albuini
Maxwell Lopes Albuini
RSRenata Pires de Araújo Castro Santos
Renata Pires de Araújo Castro Santos
LALuciano Aparecido de Almeida-Junior
Luciano Aparecido de Almeida-Junior
CFCarlos Flores-Mir
Carlos Flores-Mir
MRMarina Guimarães Roscoe
Marina Guimarães Roscoe

21 October 2020 in The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MFMurilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres
Murilo Fernando Neuppmann Feres
OEOsama Eissa
Osama Eissa
MRMarina Guimarães Roscoe
Marina Guimarães Roscoe
To compare the condyle sagittal position of class I and class II division 2 in orthodontic patients. Fifty orthodontic cases (30 females and 20 males; 12-31 years) from the records of an Orthodontic Graduate Program were collected. Such cases presented cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) as part of their initial diagnostic examinations. The study sample constituted two groups, i.e. class I and class II division 2 groups. A previously calibrated examiner performed the measurements of the images, representing the distance between the condyle and the articular surface of the glenoid fossa, both anteriorly (anterior disk space-ADS) and posteriorly (posterior disk space-PDS). Descriptive statistics were performed. Data were normally distributed, and parametric tests were used. Paired sample test was used to identify differences between the right and the left joints. Differences between class I and class II/2 groups were tested using independent t test. All statistical tests were interpreted at 5% significance level. When the study groups were compared in relation to the dimensions observed for the right and the left ADS and PDS, no significant differences were detected. This study also calculated the differences between right and left disk spaces within the groups, and the differences were not significant for both class I and class II/2 groups. The results demonstrated, after the performance of a CBCT comparative analysis, that there is no significant difference between class II/2 and class I orthodontic patients in relation to the condyle sagittal position. The results collected here refute the expectation of spontaneous mandibular anterior repositioning after correcting the overbite in class II/2 patients.