Marginal and Internal Misfit of Occlusal Veneers Made in Resin-matrix Ceramics.

OBJECTIVE: Considering that misfit is a significant predictor of the clinical success of indirect restorations, the objective of this study was to evaluate the marginal and internal misfit of two computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) RMC ceramic materials used as occlusal veneers (OVs) of different thicknesses. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A CAD model of a mandibular first molar was obtained and OV preparations 0.5-, 1.0-, and 1.5-mm thick were modeled and milled in two different materials (n=10/group): resin nanoceramic (RNC) and polymer-infiltrated ceramic network (PICN). Using the same CAD model, tooth preparations were milled in fiber-reinforced epoxy resin (n=20/thickness). The marginal and internal misfit of the restorations was assessed by X-ray microtomography. The measurements of the marginal gap (MG) and absolute marginal discrepancy were performed in two locations on each slice, whereas internal gap (IG) measurements were performed at ten locations on each slice. The data obtained were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance and Tukey post-hoc tests (α=0.05). RESULTS: No significant effect was attributable to the material type or material-thickness interaction for the MG, absolute marginal discrepancy (AMD), or IG (p>0.05). However, the thickness significantly affected the IG of the restorations (p<0.05). CAD/CAM RNC and PICN systems presented similar MG and AMD for OVs 0.5-, 1.0-, and 1.5-mm thick. However, the IG varied between thicknesses.

A Critical Perspective on Mechanical Testing of Implants and Prostheses.

The degree of interplay among variables in dental implant treatment presents a challenge to randomized clinical trials attempting to answer questions in a timely, unbiased, and economically feasible fashion. Further adding complexity to the different scenarios is the varied implant designs and related bone response, area of implantation, implant bulk material, restoration, abutments and related screws, fixation mode (screwed, fixed, or a combination), and horizontal implant-abutment matching geometry. This article critically appraises the most common mechanical testing methods used to characterize the implant-prostheses complex. It attempts to provide insight into the process of construction of an informed database of clinically relevant questions regarding preclinical evaluation of implant biomechanics and failure mechanisms. The use of single load to failure, fatigue life, fatigue limit, and step-stress accelerated life testing is discussed with emphasis on their deliverables, weaknesses, and strengths. Fractographic analysis and challenges in the correlation between laboratory- and in-service-produced failures of dental ceramics, resin composites, and titanium are introduced. In addition, examples are presented of mechanical characterization studies used in our laboratory to assess some implant-supported rehabilitation variables.