Comparative Evaluation of Fracture Resistance of Composite Core Buildup Materials: An In Vitro Study.

Aim This study aimed to compare the fracture resistance of different materials used in composite core buildups, including conventional filler composite, nanofiller composite, and short fiber-reinforced composite (SFRC). Methods This in vitro study was conducted on 30 freshly extracted premolars. The teeth were treated using a uniform endodontic procedure, and Fiber Posts (REFORPOST, Angelus) were placed. The teeth were then divided into three groups and restored using different materials. Group 1 was restored using SFRC (everX Posterior, GC, Europe), Group 2 using microfiller composite (Te-Econom Flow, Ivoclar Vivadent), and Group 3 using nanofiller composite (Tetric N-Flow, Ivoclar Vivadent). The restoration materials were then light-cured for 40 seconds. The teeth were placed in a Universal Testing Machine (Instron) and a load was applied with a stainless-steel ball (4 mm diameter) until the tooth fractured. The fracture load for each tooth was recorded, and after the mechanical test, the experimental groups were examined for failure modes. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 21.0 software. A one-way ANOVA test was conducted to compare more than two groups, followed by Tukey's test for post hoc pairwise comparison. Results The mean fracture resistance of the microfiller composite (346.94±44.63) was the lowest among the three groups. When analyzed using Tukey's test at p<0.05, fracture resistance was significantly higher in the SFRC, followed by nanofillers and microfiller composites. Conclusion Due to the increasing demand for aesthetic restorations in recent years, composites have become important in modern restorative dentistry. The development and implementation of composite dental restorative materials rely on a comprehensive understanding of each composite component and consideration of methods for modifying each component. As a result, the findings of this study will be beneficial in determining which material to use based on specific cases.

A Comparative Study to Check the Accuracy of Tooth Shade Selection With Standardized Digital Photographs and a Spectrophotometer.

BACKGROUND: The success of any dental prosthesis depends on aesthetics and function. A proper shade selection is a prime requisite for providing aesthetics to dental patients. PURPOSE: This study aims to compare the photographic method of shade selection with that of a digital spectrophotometer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 50 participants. The primary inclusion criterion was the presence of the maxillary left central incisor without a history of restorative or endodontic procedures. The shade of the left maxillary central incisor was determined using the VITA Easyshade V spectrophotometer (VITA Zahnfabrik, BadSäckingen, Germany) and the digital photography method for all the selected participants. The CIELAB colour space utilizes three values (L*, a*, and b*) to objectively measure colour. While the digital photography approach used Adobe Photoshop software (Adobe Systems Incorporated, San Jose, CA) to report solely the L*, a*, and b* values, the spectrophotometer reported the L*, a*, and b* values along with the actual shade. After obtaining the values of L*, a*, and b*, ΔE, which is their difference, was calculated using a standard formula. Statistical analysis was carried out by using Student's t-test and proportion z-test. RESULTS: When the comparison of the L*a*b* values was done, Student's t-test showed similar (P>0.05) L(t=0.16, P=0.872), a (t=0.52, P=0.607), and b (t=0.23, P=0.820) values between the two groups; that is, they did not differ significantly or showed perfect matching. There was agreement (ΔE≤2) in 42 (84.0%) cases and disagreement (ΔE>2) in eight (16.0%) cases. The proportion z-test showed an agreement of 84.0%, which was statistically highly significant (z=20.44, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The true shade of the teeth can be depicted using standardized digital images.

Minimally invasive techniques for sinus floor elevation using dental implants among Indians.

It is of interest to compare conventional lateral window technique, trans-alveolar technique with minimally invasive technique like modified trephine technique and antral membrane balloon elevation technique for sinus floor elevation in placement of dental implants. The current study included 140 participants (191 dental implants) who had maxillary posterior edentulous regions and had low sinuses and insufficient alveolar ridges but had chosen an implant-retained prosthesis. The minimally invasive techniques of sinus augmentation can be suitable alternative to conventional traumatic techniques due to low incidence of pain, gingival swelling. Moreover, the success rate of implants and increase in total bone height was almost same in minimally invasive techniques of sinus augmentation as compared to conventional traumatic techniques.