Surface structure characteristics of dental implants and their potential changes following installation: a literature review

Dental implants have been utilized for many years to treat individuals with missing teeth. To optimize the long-term success rate of such implants, new designs, surfaces, and materials have been analyzed. It is important for the clinician to have a background in the field of implant surface design, to be familiar with the strengths and limitations of the available options, and to be aware of the alterations in surface structure that may occur following installation. This article provides a detailed review of the structure and the surface characteristics of dental implants, the modifications of implant surface, as well as the methods of evaluating implant surface structure. Moreover, it provides information concerning the structural changes that may take place at the time of dental implant placement. It is important for clinicians to be aware of such changes to plan and execute implant procedures with the highest possible success and implant survival rates.

Prevalence of Finishing Line Location of Prepared Teeth for Cast Posts and Cores and Types of Previous Restorations

The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and characteristics of supra- and subgingival finishing lines on different tooth surfaces prepared for post and core restoration. Sixty endodontically treated teeth were prepared for cast posts and cores with chamfer finishing lines. Before post and core preparation, the lowest height of the clinical crown (LHCC) from the gingival margin was measured on each surface for comparison with LHCC after preparation. The results showed that the number of subgingival finishing line for post and core preparations (80.0%) was greatly higher than those with supragingival finishing line (20.0%). Most of the preparations with subgingival finishing line (N=48) involved the distal surfaces (75.0%). One-way ANOVA and Tukey’s post hoc test showed that there was a significant difference between LHCC’s before and after preparation on the buccal surface (p=.012). There was a high prevalence of subgingival finishing line on the proximal surfaces. In order to achieve excellent restorations, tooth preparation and impression taking should be carefully considered. Hence, this study strongly suggested further research on which impression material would be most suitable for recording subgingival finishing line.