Evaluation of Bond Strength of Cantilever Resin-retained Bridge Designs: An In Vitro Study.

AIM: The aim of the study was to compare the bond strength of three cantilever resin-bonded bridge (RBB) designs cemented with resin cements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four extracted human mandibular canines with eight teeth per group were used in this study to evaluate the bond strength of cantilever resin-retained bridge designs of the mesh, perforated, and combination of mesh and perforated luted to the prepared lingual surface of canine teeth using resin cement. Debonding was done using Instron universal testing machine by applying load on the mid-buccal region of the pontic and the obtained values were evaluated. The data was analyzed statistically. RESULTS: The mean shear bond strengths of mesh, perforated, and combination of mesh and perforated are 0.88 ± 0.31 MPa, 0.81 ± 0.31 MPa, and 0.93 ± 0.32 MPa. However, there is no significant differences in the statistical analysis that were performed using a one-factor analysis of variant (ANOVA) test (p = 0.744). CONCLUSION: Within the limitation of this study for cantilever resin-retained bridge designs, the combination of mesh and perforated design showed greater mean shear bond values when compared with the mesh design and perforated designs. This shows equal in vitro performance to the gold standard designs (group A is mesh design and group B is perforated design). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The new design which is the combination of mesh and perforated shows equal in vitro performance to the gold standard designs. Thus, their use in clinical situation can bring better result in concern to cantilever resin-retained prosthesis.

Mayo, Myriad, America Invents Act and BPCIA: how has the United States biopharmaceutical market been affected?

This paper discusses how the United States biopharmaceutical market has been affected by recent changes in patent law resulting from United States legislations (Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act and the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act) and Supreme Court precedents (Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. and Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics). The authors interviewed eight key opinion leaders from the United States knowledgeable in biopharmaceuticals, including industry veterans, patent counsel, senior scientists and jurists. This paper summarizes the opinions of the key opinion leaders. This paper explains the impact of these Supreme Court decisions - i.e., broadening the exceptions to patent eligibility for law of nature and natural phenomenon - on biopharmaceutical innovations and provides future perspectives.