Evaluation of the mechanical behavior and marginal accuracy of stock and laser-Sintered implant abutments

[Purpose] The aim of this study was to evaluate the marginal accuracy and mechanical behavior of implant-supported crowns restored with original stock abutments and nonoriginal computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture laser-sintered abutments.[Materials and Methods] A total of 26 implants were divided in two groups (n = 13 each) as follows: implants connected to original stock abutments (OS) and implants connected to nonoriginal laser-sintered abutments (LS). Of these, 10 samples were cross-sectioned to measure the marginal accuracy under a scanning electron microscope. In addition, 16 samples were used to study the mechanical behavior. Two tests were performed: (1) static load and (2) dynamic load after thermocycling with artificial saliva.[Results] OS exhibited the best marginal accuracy; however, the LS gap was within the clinically acceptable range of marginal discrepancy. No significant differences were found in the mechanical tests.[Conclusions] Both abutments are acceptable alternatives to restore implants, although the original abutments showed better fit than nonoriginals

EPA consensus project paper: anterior full or partial coverage single tooth restorations - a systematic review of survival and complication rates

Introduction: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the literature reporting on the failure rates, survival rates and complication rates and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) of anterior full (FC) or partial (PC) coverage single tooth restorations after a mean observation period of at least 3 years. Methods: Systematic search was conducted using the electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane library. Data regarding survival (restoration failure) and complication rates and PROMs were extracted and presented descriptively. Results: Altogether 42 studies were included in the analysis (28 with FC, 12 with PC and 2 with both types of restorations). For FC restorations the estimated annual failure rate was 0.72 (95%CI: 0.33-1.57), resulting in a 5-year survival rate of 96.4% (95%CI: 92.4-98.3). For PC restorations, the estimated annual failure rate was 0.62 (95%CI: 0.27-1.46), resulting in a 5-year survival rate of 96.9% (95%CI: 93.0-98.7). There was no significant difference between the groups regarding survival or technical complications, while significantly fewer biological complications were observed with PC compared to FC restorations (test for subgroup differences, p=0.01). Conclusions: FC and PC restorations showed high 5-year survival rates but the teeth restored with FC restorations may be more prone to biological complications.</p

Digitalization in restorative dentistry

igitalization is the first step involving a digital restorative dentistry workflow. Although the digitalization process was initially confined to CAD/CAM (computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing) dental procedures, nowadays a much wider range of dental procedures have been revolutionized by their ongoing digitalization. Digitalization consists basically of converting any physical 2D or 3D volume into an electronic information language codified in terms of only two possible digits (0 or 1) normally contained in an informatic file. The number of digitalized procedures and devices that have been incorporated into restorative dentistry is substantially growing. Digital photograph cameras, spectrophotometers for tooth shade matching, intraoral and extraoral scanners and 2D/3D radiological devices, spectrophotogrammetry, facial scanners, and jaw track motion systems are the main devices used to obtain digital information in restorative dentistry. The aim of this chapter is to describe to the reader the characteristics of every single family of devices as well as their specific nomenclature, features, and the types of file use