Five-year clinical performance of two fluoride-releasing giomer resin materials in occlusal restorations.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the clinical performance of two nano-hybrid giomer restorative composite materials after 5 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-four pairs of restorations (total n = 88) of a flowable giomer (Beautifil Flow Plus F00; Shofu Inc., Kyoto, Japan) and a conventional nano-hybrid giomer restorative material (Beautifil II; Shofu Inc.) were placed in Class I cavities after the application of a dentin adhesive (FL-Bond II; Shofu Inc.) and a flowable liner (Beautifil Flow Plus F03; Shofu Inc). After 5 years, 32 pairs of restorations were assessed using the modified United States Public Health Service criteria. Both tested materials were compared using Fisher's exact test and each tested clinical criterion for each material was analyzed separately with respect to different follow-up periods using Friedman's test (a = 0.05). RESULTS: None of the restorations showed complete retention loss, post-operative sensitivity, secondary caries or color change. There were no significant changes to any of the clinical criteria for each material during the 5-year evaluation period (p > 0.05) and no significant differences between the two materials in all clinical parameters after 5 years (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Five-year clinical performance of both two nano-hybrid giomer restorative materials was comparably acceptable and not significantly different for any of the parameters evaluated. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Nano-hybrid giomer-based materials are clinically acceptable for the restoration of occlusal cavities as they demonstrate excellent performance after 5 years.

Prospective 5-year clinical evaluation of posterior zirconia fixed dental prostheses veneered with milled lithium disilicate (CADon).

OBJECTIVE: Bi-layer zirconia-based posterior fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) have reportedly a high incidence of veneering ceramic fractures. The CADon technique employs zirconia frameworks veneered with milled lithium disilicate glass-ceramic to overcome these shortcomings but long-term clinical studies are missing. This study evaluated the clinical efficacy of posterior 3-unit CADOn FDPs over a 5-year period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 25 patients, 16 male and 9 female with a mean age of 55.6 years, received a total of 25 posterior three-unit CADOn FDPs. Patients were recalled for baseline and for follow-up visits at 6, 12, 24, and 60 months. Parameters evaluated were fracture, marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, wear, polish, color match, surface staining, and retention of these restorations as well as secondary caries of the abutment teeth. RESULTS: A total of 21 FDPs evaluated at 60-months revealed a 100% survival rate. All evaluated clinical parameters were satisfactory (alpha or bravo) and there was no statistically significant difference at different time points, except for surface staining, which was also worse at 60 months compared to baseline (p  ≤  0.001). CONCLUSIONS: CADOn three-unit posterior FDPs demonstrate excellent fracture resistance after 5 years of clinical function. All evaluated clinical parameters were satisfactory, except for surface stain, which also increased over time. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Conventionally veneered bi-layer zirconia-based posterior FDPs have limited clinical success. Based on this study, alternative methods such as zirconia frameworks veneered with milled lithium disilicate glass-ceramic provide a viable alternative with excellent long-term clinical outcomes.

Resonance frequency analysis as a predictor of early implant failure in the partially edentulous posterior maxilla following immediate nonfunctional loading or delayed loading with single unit restorations.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the ability of baseline resonance frequency analysis (RFA) measurements to predict early implant failure in the posterior maxilla and to evaluate potential correlations between this measurement with Hounsfield units, bone quality variables, and implant dimension. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective randomized study involved 46 SLActive Straumann implants placed in the posterior maxillae of 21 subjects. Each patient received at least one control (delayed loading) and one experimental (immediate nonfunctional loading) implant. Each site was evaluated with presurgical computer-assisted tomography (CT) scans, histomorphometric analysis of bone cores, and subjective determination of bone quality. Baseline implant stability quotients (ISQ) were determined by RFA measurements made at the time of fixture placement. Pearson's correlation analysis and Spearman's test were used to identify statistically significant correlations within the resultant data. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine whether baseline ISQ values can accurately predict early implant failure. RESULTS: The mean baseline ISQ values for the two groups were 66.8 (experimental) and 66.2 (control). The 12-month survival rates were 86.4% (experimental) and 100% (control). There were no statistically significant correlations between baseline ISQ values and early implant failure, bone quality variables, or implant dimension. ROC analysis showed that baseline ISQ values cannot predict early implant failure. CONCLUSION: Baseline RFA measurements were not able to predict early failure of immediately loaded implants placed in the posterior maxilla and therefore should not be used to determine whether an implant is a candidate for immediate nonfunctional loading in this region of the mouth.

Postoperative tooth sensitivity with a new self-adhesive resin cement--a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated and compared sensitivity of teeth after cementation of full-coverage crowns with a new self-adhesive resin cement (SARC). A resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) served as control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-eight full-coverage crowns were cemented to vital teeth with either the self-adhesive cement iCem (Heraeus Kulzer; n = 44) or the RMGIC GC Fuji PLUS (GC, n = 44). Before preparations, patients were questioned for sensitivity (patient sensitivity, PS). In addition, air was blown for 2 s onto the buccal cementoenamel junction (air sensitivity, AS), and ice spray was applied in the cementoenamel junction area (ice sensitivity, IS). Patient responses were recorded with a visual analog scale. After cementation of the crowns, patients were recalled for follow-up (f/u) visits at 1 day, 1 week, and 3 weeks. PS, AS, and IS were recorded during each visit. Data were analyzed with Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: The two groups revealed comparable sensitivity scores at baseline. SARC showed significantly lower PS sensitivity scores at 1 day (p = 0.02) and significantly lower AS scores at 1-week follow-up (p = 0.01). IS generally produced the highest sensitivity scores with SARC revealing significantly lower scores at all follow-up visits. CONCLUSION: Cementation of crowns with the SARC tested in this study resulted in overall lower postoperative sensitivity than with the RMGIC. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Among other clinical advantages, some self-adhesive resin cements seem to lower postoperative sensitivity of crowned teeth.

In vitro comparative bond strength of contemporary self-adhesive resin cements to zirconium oxide ceramic with and without air-particle abrasion.

This study compared shear bond strengths of six self-adhesive resin cements to zirconium oxide ceramic with and without air-particle abrasion. One hundred twenty zirconia samples were air-abraded (group SB; n = 60) or left untreated (group NO). Composite cylinders were bonded to the zirconia samples with either BisCem (BC), Maxcem (MC), G-Cem (GC), RelyX Unicem Clicker (RUC), RelyX Unicem Applicator (RUA), or Clearfil SA Cement (CSA). Shear bond strength was tested after thermocycling, and data were analyzed with analysis of variance and Holm-Sidak pairwise comparisons. Without abrasion, RUA (8.0 MPa), GC (7.9 MPa), and CSA (7.6 MPa) revealed significantly higher bond strengths than the other cements. Air-particle abrasion increased bond strengths for all test cements (p < 0.001). GC (22.4 MPa) and CSA (18.4 MPa) revealed the highest bond strengths in group SB. Bond strengths of self-adhesive resin cements to zirconia were increased by air-particle abrasion. Cements containing adhesive monomers (MDP/4-META) were superior to other compositions.

Double-masked, randomized, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of intranasal K305 (3% tetracaine plus 0.05% oxymetazoline) in anesthetizing maxillary teeth.

BACKGROUND: The authors compared the local anesthetic efficacy and safety of an intranasally administered formulation of tetracaine and oxymetazoline (K305) with placebo in adult participants undergoing single dental restorative procedures in teeth nos. 4 through 13. METHODS: The authors screened and allocated 150 participants in a double-masked, randomized fashion to either K305 or placebo nasal spray. The authors delivered the study drug as two 0.2-milliliter sprays separated by 4 minutes inside the nostril on the side ipsilateral to the tooth being treated. The authors administered a third 0.2-mL spray, if necessary, and administered 4% articaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine by means of injection if anesthesia was inadequate. Safety evaluations included participant reports of adverse events, vital signs, and alcohol sniff tests during the 2-hour study period and at a 1-day follow-up visit. The primary efficacy end point was anesthetic success defined as the completion of the dental procedure without the need for rescue injectable local anesthetic. The authors evaluated differences in success rates observed between K305 and placebo by using a 1-sided Fisher exact test. RESULTS: The overall success rates were 88.0% (95% confidence interval, 80.0-93.6) and 28% (95% confidence interval, 16.2-42.5) for K305 and placebo, respectively (P < .0001). The most frequent adverse effects in the K305 group were rhinorrhea (57.0%) and nasal congestion (26.0%). No serious adverse events occurred during this study. CONCLUSIONS: K305 was effective and well tolerated during restorative procedures in adult participants. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: K305 provides a needleless alternative for obtaining maxillary pulpal anesthesia on premolars, canines, and incisors.

A retrospective survey on long-term survival of posterior zirconia and porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns in private practice.

OBJECTIVES: This retrospective survey assessed the clinical survival of zirconia-based crowns (PFZ) and conventional porcelain- fused-to-metal (PFM) crowns on posterior teeth in private practice. METHOD AND MATERIALS: A print survey of 13 private practitioners was conducted to assess the long-term survival of previously placed full-coverage crowns. The practitioners reported a total of 2,182 premolar (n = 881) and molar (n = 1,301) full-coverage single crowns, 1,102 PFZ and 1,080 PFM, fabricated by one dental laboratory (Cusp, Boston) and followed over 7.4 years. All post-cementation complications (eg, porcelain fractures and chippings) were recorded as failures. In the PFZ group, one veneering porcelain (CZR, Kuraray Noritake) was used in combination with three coping systems (Lava, 3M ESPE; Procera, Nobelbiocare; Katana, Kuraray Noritake). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: The probability of survival of posterior crowns investigated over the period of study (7.4 years) was 99.3% for PFM and 99.2% for PFZ restorations. There was no statistically significant difference (P = .614) between PFZ and PFM groups. In the PFZ group, probability of survival was 97.7% for Lava, 100% for Procera, and 99.5% for Katana. There were no statistically significant differences (P = .34) between the three PFZ systems or the location of the crowns (premolar or molar; P = .454). CONCLUSION: PFZ crowns fabricated with CZR and three commercial zirconia coping systems revealed excellent long-term success rates. Survival times and survival probabilities of posterior PFZ crowns did not differ from PFM crowns and were independent of type of coping system and location (molar or premolar teeth).

The current state of adhesive dentistry: a guide for clinical practice.

Adhesive dentistry is key to minimally invasive, esthetic, and tooth-preserving dental restorations. These are typically realized by bonding various restorative materials, such as composite resins, ceramics, or even metal alloys, to tooth structures or other materials with composite resin luting agents. For optimal bond strengths and long-lasting clinical success, however, these material and tooth substrates require their respective pretreatment steps, based on their natures and compositions. Today, dental adhesion is used in almost all dental specialties. This article summarizes key aspects and guidelines for clinical success with adhesive dentistry and summarizes information presented at the 5th International Congress on Adhesive Dentistry.