Marginal Fit Metal-Ceramic and In-Ceram Single Crown Cement retained in Implant-supported Abutments.

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the cervical fit of cemented metal-ceramic and In-Ceram implant-supported crowns, before and after the cementing procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty crowns cemented on implant abutments are divided into two groups (n = 10): Group 1 -cemented metal-ceramic crowns and group 2 - cemented In-Ceram crowns. The marginal adaptations before and after cementation were evaluated in a comparison microscope with an error of 1 µm. All crowns were cemented with zinc phosphate cement. RESULTS: The cervical misalignment of cemented crowns before cementation (52.65 ± 11.83 and 85.73 ± 14.06 µm) was lower than that after cementation (66.80 ± 15.86 and 89.36 ± 22.66 µm). CONCLUSION: The cementing procedure interferes with the marginal fit of cemented crowns on implant abutments, with the prosthesis having better adaptation before cementation. Cemented metal-ceramic crowns exhibited better cervical adaptation than In-Ceram crowns cemented before and after the cementing procedure. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The maintenance of gum health and the longevity of prosthetic restorations are closely related to the restoration's marginal integrity.

The impact of healing time before loading on orthodontic mini-implant stability: a histomorphometric study in minipigs.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate healing time before loading, areas compression and tension and location of insertion on mini-implant stability. DESIGN: Six minipigs were used. Each animal received 3 mini-implants in each quadrant: 1 mini-implant was used as an unloaded control (G1, n=24); the other 2 were loaded with 150g-force at three time intervals (G2: immediate loading, G3: after 15 days and G4: after 30 days), with 16 mini-implant in each experimental group. After 120 days, tissue blocks of the areas of interest were harvested. Clinical analysis (exact Fisher test) determined the survival rate. Histological analysis (Kontron KS 300™, Zeiss) quantified the fractional bone-to-implant contact (%BIC) and bone area (%BA) at each healing time point, areas of interest, and insertion site (ANOVA and t tests for dependent and independent samples). RESULTS: The mini-implant survival rates were G1: 71%, G2: 50%, G3: 75% and G4: 63%, with no statistical differences between them. The groups presented similar %BIC and %BA. There were no differences between the compression and tension sides or maxillary and mandibular insertion sites. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that low-intensity immediate or early orthodontic loading does not affect mini-implant stability, because similar histomorphometric results were observed for all the groups, with partial osseointegration of the mini-implants present.

Effect of different surface treatments on the repair bond strength of indirect composites.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the tensile bond strength of indirect composites repaired with different surface treatments and direct composites. METHODS: 180 specimens were prepared with Targis, belleGlass HP and Sculpture indirect composites, light-activated and post-cured according to the manufacturers' recommendations. The specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 hours at 37 degrees C. The bonding surfaces were prepared with air abrasion, hydrofluoric acid or hydrofluoric acid followed by a neutralizing solution. All the treated surfaces were subject to the application of a silane and a bonding agent before the repair procedures with Tetric Ceram and Tetric Flow for the Targis specimens, Herculite XRV and Revolution for the belleGlass HP specimens and Sculp-It and Flow-It for Sculpture specimens. The tensile bond strength tests were carried out using a universal testing machine at cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/minute. The type of fracture was observed under a light microscope at x40 magnification. Data were analyzed by a two-way ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc tests (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Targis showed a statistically higher repair bond strength than belleGlass HP and Sculpture, which were not significantly different from each other. Air abrasion increased the repair bond strength of belleGlass HP and Sculpture. For Targis, all the surface treatments resulted in similar repair bond strength. The different viscosity of repair composites did not affect the repair of indirect composites. Fractured surfaces showed mostly adhesive failures, mainly with hydrofluoric acid treatment.

Reconstruction of anterior teeth using an aesthetic post-and-core and all-ceramic material.

Ceramic post-and-core systems offer biocompatibility, aesthetics, reinforcement of the remnant root, and prosthesis retention. Aesthetic posts-and-cores contribute to the optical properties of the overlying restorations when metal-free crowns are used. This article illustrates the use of these materials to provide strength and aesthetics during the restoration of endodontically treated teeth. The case presentation detailed herein demonstrates the rehabilitation of anterior dentition following substantial structural loss and exhibits the biomechanical treatment of these structures using contemporary restorative materials.

Fracture resistance of teeth directly and indirectly restored with composite resin and indirectly restored with ceramic materials.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the fracture resistance of teeth restored with direct and indirect restorations of composite resin and restored with indirect ceramic restorations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-six maxillary premolar teeth were chosen and divided at random into seven equal groups; Group 1 (control): intact teeth; Group 2: MOD cavity preparations, 1/2 intercuspal distance, with rounded internal angles, convergent walls, unrestored; Group 3: MOD cavity preparations, 1/2 intercuspal distance, divergent walls; Group 4: same preparation as Group 2, restored with direct composite resin (Single Bond/Filtek Z250-3M); Group 5: same as Group 3, restored with indirect composite resin (Artglass/Single Bond/Rely X); Group 6: same as Group 3, restored with indirect composite resin (Targis/Single Bond/Rely X); Group 7: same as Group 3, restored with indirect ceramic restoration (Empress/Single Bond/Rely X). The specimens were subjected to a compressive axial loading in a Universal testing machine at 0.5 mm/minute by means of a steel bar (8 mm in diameter). RESULTS: The mean fracture strength obtained was: Group 1: 1.91 kN; Group 2: 1.06 kN; Group 3: 0.93 kN; Group 4: 1.45 kN; Group 5: 1.81 kN; Group 6: 1.81 kN; Group 7: 1.77 kN. The restored teeth with direct composite restoration increased the fracture resistance of Group 4 up to 76% of a level comparable with the intact teeth (Group 1). However, statistical analysis indicated no significant (P < 0.05) differences between Group 1 (intact teeth) and restored teeth groups, with direct restorations as well as indirect restorations. Both cavity preparation designs weakened the remaining tooth structure. These results demonstrated that a bonded indirect restoration could satisfactorily be an ideal option for restoring teeth weakened by wide cavity preparation.