Clinical Survival of Indirect, Anterior Surface-Retained Fiber-Reinforced Composite Fixed Dental Prosthesis: Up to 3-Year Follow-up.

This study evaluated the performance of indirect, anterior, surface-retained, fiber-reinforced-composite restorations (ISFRCR). Between September-2011 and September-2012, 17 patients (13 females, 4 males, mean age: 40.5) received 17 indirect ISFRCRs (maxilla=4; mandible=13). All restorations were made on a plaster model using unidirectional E-glass fibers (Interlig, Angelus) in combination with a veneering resin composite (Gradia, GC) and cemented adhesively (Choice 2, Bisco). No cavity preparations were made on the abutmentteeth. Before cementation, enamel surfaces were cleaned with pumice and etched with 38% H3PO4 for 30 s, rinsed 30 s. Then, adhesive resin was applied accordingly. Patients were followed every 3 months until May 2014. The evaluation protocol involved technical (chipping, debonding or fracture of tooth/restoration) and biological failures (caries). Survival (Kaplan Meier) and annual failure rates were calculated. Mean observation time was 34.6 months. Altogether, 5 failures were observed [survival rate: 70.5%] of which 3 were debondings and 2 delaminations of the veneering composite (chipping). All defective restorations were repaired or recemented, except one, which was remade.

Effect of screw access channel filling materials on uniaxial retentive force of cement-retained implant restorations.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the effect of various abutment screw access channel filling materials on the uniaxial retention of castings cemented onto the abutment using temporary cement. METHODS: Ten straight, regular platform Esthetic Abutments were used. Fifty castings were divided into five groups and the abutment screw access channels were filled with composite resin (Filtek Z 250), light-cured temporary filling (Clip), temporary filling (Coltosol), polyvinyl siloxane impression material (Elite H-D), or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) tape. Castings were cemented and thermal cycled. A uniaxial tensile force with a cross-head speed of 5 mm/min, was applied to the castings until cement failure occurred. One-way analysis of variance was used to perform intergroup comparisons of the mean uniaxial retentive force (URF) values and Tukey's HSD test was used to determine the group causing the difference. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences between the mean URF values for the groups (p < 0.01). The mean URF value for the composite resin group was statistically higher than those for the other filling material groups respectively (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The retention of castings cemented to straight implant abutments using non-eugenol temporary cement may be influenced by the screw access channel filling material.

Relationships between implant stability, image-based measures and nitric oxide levels.

For monitoring of dental implants, practitioners seem to use simultaneously a variety of image-based and laboratory measurements. This longitudinal study was conducted to analyse the possible relationships between nitric oxide (NO) content of peri-implant sulcus fluid (PISF), marginal bone levels and implant stability in terms of resonance frequency analysis (RFA) at immediately (IL) and conventionally (CL) loaded mandibular molar dental implants from the same individuals. Dental implants were placed in 10 patients who had first molar loss bilaterally in the mandibular area. One site of the patient was determined as IL and the other site was CL. PISF samples, marginal bone level and RFA were taken for all dental implants during a 12-month follow-up period. For both types of loading, there were no significant changes at implant stability (ISQ) and PISF volume during the whole study period. The lowest total nitrite levels were observed at the end of 12 months. Marginal bone gain of 0.22 and 0.09 mm was noticed between 6 and 12 months in IL and CL groups, respectively. During the study period, negative correlation was noted between radiographic bone level and ISQ at both IL and CL sites; however, this correlation reached a significant level only at 6 months in CL implant group (P = 0.015). Although not significant, marginal bone loss seems to have a negative relationship with the implant stability values regardless of the mode of loading. NO metabolism around IL and CL dental implants may not demonstrate a significantly different pattern.