Preliminary Study to Evaluate Marginal Bone Loss in Cases of 2- and 3-Implant-Supported Fixed Partial Prostheses of the Posterior Mandible.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate, by radiographic examinations, the marginal bone resorption around implants in cases of 2 and 3 implant-supported fixed partial prostheses (FPPs) at the posterior mandible. METHODS: A retrospective study of 41 patients (23 males, 18 females) of an average age of 67 years (range, 53-85), with 2 and 3 implants-supported FPPs in the posterior mandible that were treated during 2006 to 2015. The mean follow-up time was 6.32 years (range, 2-10). Twenty-four patients had FPPs on 2 implants (a total of 48 implants). Seventeen patients had FPPs on 3 implants (a total of 51 implants). Clinical and radiographic follow-up examinations were performed. All radiographs were analyzed for changes in marginal bone height surrounding the implants. RESULTS: The mean marginal bone loss around the most mesial implant was slightly higher in the 2-implant group (0.833 mm) compared with the 3-implant group (0.431 mm). The correlation between the mean marginal bone loss around the most mesial implant and the number of implants was of borderline value (P = 0.055). CONCLUSIONS: Considering the limitations of this preliminary study, the authors found that the mesial implant in the 2-implant group is more susceptible to marginal bone loss.

Effect of Two Traditional Polyacrylic Acid Conditioners and 2% Chlorhexidine Digluconate on Cavosurface Microleakage of Glass Ionomer Restorations.

OBJECTIVES: A lack of appropriate adhesiveness is one of the biggest problems in restorative dentistry today and the main cause of microleakage. This is especially true in pediatric dentistry where moisture control is more difficult to achieve. Glass ionomer restorative materials increase adhesion and decrease microleakage given their chemical adhesion to the remaining tooth substance. Pretreatment improves the adhesion quality. The aim of this study was to assess the microleakage of Glass ionomer restorative materials following application of 20% polyacrylic acid, 10% polyacrylic acid or 2% chlorhexidine digluconate in Class V cavities. STUDY DESIGN: Two Class V preparations were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 24 extracted human molars. The gingival wall was set below or above the CEJ. The teeth were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 was treated with 20% polyacrylic acid or 10% polyacrylic acid. Group 2 was treated with 10% polyacrylic acid or 2% chlorhexidine digluconate. Microleakage was evaluated using a light-reflecting stereomicroscope and stain penetration test. RESULTS: Two percent chlorhexidine digluconate was as efficient as the other conditioners. No statistically significant differences were found among the three types of conditioners. Dye penetration was significantly greater into dentin than into enamel among all three conditioners in both groups (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Two percent chlorhexidine digluconate, with its known added advantages, can be used as a pretreatment conditioner in GI restorations.

A comparison of temperature increases produced by "premium" and "standard" diamond burs: An in-vitro study.

OBJECTIVE: Vital tooth preparations may cause irreversible thermal damage to the pulp. The manufacturing techniques of dental burs may decrease heat production and minimize the risk of overheating and trauma to the dental pulp. Strauss (Raanana, Israel) has introduced "premium" diamond burs, claiming superior efficiency and longevity. We sought to determine the safest preparation methods by performing a comparison of intrapulpal temperature increases caused with "standard" and "premium" burs. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Three types of diamond burs (F1R, F21R, and K2) were tested on extracted human teeth (n = 8 teeth per bur type). Premium and standard manufacturing techniques were compared for each bur type (n = 24 teeth per group; total 48 teeth). An intrapulpal thermocouple was used to measure the temperature during the procedure. Comparisons were analyzed with the t test and one-way ANOVA. P ≤ .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: All premium burs demonstrated lower temperature increases compared to the standard burs (P ≤ .001 for F21R and K2, P = .086 for F1R). The temperature increases with premium burs were similar for different bur shapes, but the temperature increases with standard burs depended on the bur shape (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Using premium diamond burs for tooth preparation may reduce the risk of pulp tissue damage, and thus reduce postoperative pulp-associated complications.