Volumetric Cuspal Deflection of Premolars Restored With Different Paste-like Bulk-fill Resin Composites Evaluated by Microcomputed Tomography.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to measure the volumetric cuspal deflection of premolars restored with different paste-like bulk-fill resin composites using microcomputed tomography (micro-CT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 35 freshly extracted human maxillary second premolars were selected for this study. Standardized large MOD cavities were prepared in each premolar with a bucco-lingual width of 4 mm and a cavity depth of 4 mm measured from the palatal cusp tip. After cavity preparation, all samples were scanned immediately using a micro-CT system. After the initial micro-CT scanning, restorative procedures were performed. Four groups received different paste-like bulk-fill composites-Beautifil-Bulk Restorative (BBR), Admira Fusion x-tra (AFX), x-tra fill, and Sonic Fill-and the control group received a conventional universal composite and Clearfil Majesty Esthetic (CME). Immediately after the restorative procedure, each tooth was scanned by micro-CT in the same manner as the initial scanning. The buccal and palatal regions of each restoration were evaluated separately in terms of cuspal deflection. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the effect of the composite resin, and multiple comparisons were performed by the Tukey test with a level of significance of α = 0.05. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Multiple comparisons showed that teeth restored with the conventional paste-like composite and CME (control) had significantly different cuspal deflection from those filled with paste-like bulk-fill composites (p<0.05). Among the bulk-fill composites, a significant difference was observed between BBR and AFX (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Paste-like bulk-fill resin composites had significantly lower cuspal deflection than the conventional paste-like resin composite tested.

Accuracy of two different voxel sizes for presurgical evaluation of mandibular osteotomy.

The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of two different voxel resolutions for the preoperative assessment of mandibular osteotomies. The study was conducted on 37 dry adult human mandibles. To obtain measurement standardization, heated gutta-percha cones were placed on the dry mandibles to mark 20 anatomical points. These cones were used for all measurement groups. Cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) scans of the mandibles were made using 0.200mm3 and 0.400mm3 voxel sizes (Planmeca Promex-3D Helsinki, Finland). The results obtained from these two groups were compared with physical measurements obtained using a digital calliper, in order to analyze their predictive value. In the study, one voxel size did not have supremacy over the other in terms of accuracy. For mandibular osteotomies, 0.400mm3 voxel size can be preferred because of lower radiation dose.

Morphometric analysis of vidian canal and its relations with surrounding anatomic structures by using cone-beam computed tomography.

BACKGROUND: We identified the vidian canal (VC) in a Turkish subpopulation on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images and explored its anatomic relationships; the canal serves as an anatomic pathway during endonasal surgical approaches. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Coronal and axial CBCT images of 100 patients (50 males and 50 females) were evaluated (slice thickness and interval, 0.5 mm). We measured the length of the VC length, extent of VC pneumatisation into the sphenoid sinus, position of the VC relative to the medial pterygopalatine plate (MPP), pterygopalatine fossa (PPF) depth, and VC-VC, VC-MPP, and VC-foramen rotundum (FR) distances, the angle between the posterior end of the middle turbinate and the lateral part of the VC anterior opening, and the angle between the VC and the palatovaginal canal. RESULTS: The mean VC length was 13.09 ± 2.07 and 13.01 ± 2.12 mm on the right and left sides, respectively. Relative to the MPP, the VC was located medially in 54.5% of patients, on the same level in 36%, and laterally in 9.5%. Pneumatisation was of grade I in 24% of patients, grade II in 33%, grade III in 23.5%, and grade IV in 19.5%. The VC-FR and VC-MPP distances were significantly greater on the left side. The angle between the posterior end of the middle turbinate and the lateral part of the anterior VC opening was significantly greater on the right side. The VC-VC distance was significantly greater when the VC lay lateral to the MPP. CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic characteristics of the VC on CBCT images unique to Turkish populations should be kept in mind during surgery.

Comparison of the influence of FOV sizes and different voxel resolutions for the assessment of periodontal defects.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the influence of different voxel resolutions of two different CBCT units on the in vitro detection of periodontal defects. METHODS: The study used 12 dry skulls with a maxilla and a mandible. Artificial defects (dehiscence, tunnel, fenestration) were separately created on the anterior, premolar and molar teeth using burrs. A total of 14 dehiscences, 13 fenestrations, 8 tunnels and 16 non-defect controls were used in the study. Images were obtained from two different CBCT units in six voxel sizes (voxel size: 0.080, 0.100, 0.125, 0.150, 0.160 and 0.200 mm3). Kappa coefficients were calculated to assess both intra- and interobserver agreements for each image set. RESULTS: Overall intraobserver kappa coefficients ranged between 0.978 and 0.973 for the 0.080-mm3 images and between 0.751 and 0.737 for the 0.160-mm3 images, suggesting notably high intraobserver agreement for detecting periodontal defects. CBCT performed significantly better at detecting fenestrations (p<0.05) than tunnel and dehiscence defects. No statistically significant difference was found between the detection of dehiscence and tunnel defects (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A voxel size of 0.150 mm3 was identified as the cut-off point for overall detection of periodontal defects. CBCT should be considered the most reliable imaging modality for the diagnosis of periodontal defects.