ABSTRACT
AIM: The purpose of this clinical case is to present the Kids Digital Crown Technique (KDCT), an innovative technique to restore primary teeth with customised prosthetic crowns. METHODS: A six-year-old patient presented to our clinic with an extensive carious process affecting tooth 8.4. After assessing the patient’s conditions, a digital intraoral impression was taken and digitally sent to the dental lab to realise a customised prosthetic crown of the tooth. After the endodontic treatment and a minimal tooth preparation the crown was cemented using a dual resin-based cement. RESULTS: The procedure permitted to realise a customised prosthetic crown ready to be applied immediately after the endodontic therapy. The crown was the correct size, easy to adapt and of the correct colour. The protocol follows an easy, kid-friendly workflow, reducing the operative time and maintaining the advantages of other procedures. CONCLUSION: Kids Digital Crown Technique is a valid procedure to restore primary teeth with prosthetic crowns. Future prospective studies will be necessary to confirm the efficacy of this technique.
Subject(s)
Crowns , Tooth, Deciduous , Bicuspid , Child , Humans , Prospective Studies , Resin CementsABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The aim of the present retrospective study was to evaluate clinical and radiological outcomes, in terms of implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, and peri-implantitis incidence, of a titanium implants with an innovative laser-treated surface. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 502 dental implants were inserted in four dental practices (Udine, Arezzo, Frascati, Roma) between 2008 and 2013. All inserted implants had laser-modified surface characterized by a series of 20-µm-diameter holes (7-10 µm deep) every 10 µm (Synthegra®, Geass srl, Italy). The minimum follow-up period was set at 1 year after the final restoration. Radiographs were taken after implant insertion (T0), at time of loading (T1), and during the follow-up period (last recall, T2). Marginal bone loss and peri-implant disease incidence were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 502 implants with a maximum follow-up period of 6 years were monitored. The mean differential between T0 and T2 was 0.05 ± 1.08 mm at the mesial aspect and 0.08 ± 1.11 mm at the distal with a mean follow-up period of 35.76 ± 18.05 months. After being in function for 1 to 6 years, implants reported varying behavior: 8.8% of sites did not show any radiographic changes and 38.5% of sites showed bone resorption. The bone appeared to have been growing coronally in 50.7% of the sites measured. CONCLUSION: Implants showed a maintenance of marginal bone levels over time, and in many cases, it seems that laser-modified implant surface could promote a bone growth. The low peri-implant disease incidence recorded could be attributed to the laser titanium surface features that seem to prevent bacterial colonization. Future randomized and controlled studies are needed to confirm the results of the present multi-centrical retrospective analysis.
