Denture Repairs: Surveys, Methods and Trends

Denture repairing is a very common practice encountered in everyday clinical removable prosthodontics. It may be consisted of fractured dentures, debonded or broken denture teeth etc. These may be due to intraoral fatigue failure of acrylic resin or the accidental dropping of dentures outside the mouth. The purpose of this presentation is under the lights of the best available evidence to identify first from surveys the most common and more imporant denture repairing procedures. It well known that the purpose of repairing e.g. a fractured denture is to restore its strength at least to the original one. It seems in practice that it is not the fact. The most popular methods of repairing dentures will be analyzed regarding their strength and the attempts to enhance it through reiforcing materials like metal wires or fibers will be presented. Finally suggestions and thoughts for further investigations considering he recent available evidence will be discussed

Residual Stresses in Cold Formed Steel Sections

Initial or residual stresses are considered one of the major factors that affect the design of the cold-formed steel sections, since they could reach 50% of the yield stress of the material. As part of a comprehensive experimental program on the use of cold-formed steel sections in transmission towers, an investigation on the magnitude and distribution of residual stresses in cold-formed steel sections was undertaken. The study involved 83 tests using two nondestructive methods, and two destructive methods, to determine the magnitude and distribution of residual stresses. The paper summarizes the results from this investigation and outlines a number of implications for the design of cold-formed sections

Bonding of Silicone Prosthetic Elastomers to Various Denture Resins

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate interfacial bond strength between different types of silicone facial elastomers and denture resins. MATERIAL AND METHODS : The facial materials studied were Cosmesil and Ideal and SR 3/60,SR 3/60 Quick and Triad were included in the group of denture resins. The " overlap-joint" model was used to evaluate bond strength and the samples were placed in tension until failure.The bonding surfaces were treated with a primer. Ten samples for each silicone/resin group were tested. The results were subjected to two-way ANOVA and Tukey\u27s test for comparison. RESULTS: The results showed that bond strength was affected by the type of silicone and denture resin. Interaction was also noted. Bond strength ranged from 0.026 to 0.229 MPa. CONCLUSION: Cosmesil condensation type silicone showed higher bond strength with the three different types of denture resins, compared to Ideal addition silicone, keeping other variables associated with silicone/resin bond fixed

Surface Modification of an Experimental Silicone Rubber Maxillofacial Material to Improve Wettability

OBJECTIVES: Good wettability of maxillofacial prosthetic materials is important so hat a lubricating layer is formed with supporting tissues thus reducing patient discomfort. The purpose of the study was to surface modify an experimental silicone rubber material in order to improve wettability. METHODS : Samples of experimental silicone rubber were surface modified by first argon plasma treatment followed by chemisorption of ethyleneoxy functional silanes. These were compared with the same silicone rubber which had ethyleneoxy functional surfactants incorporated into the polymer matrix. In all cases contact angles, tear strength and water uptake were measured. RESULTS: Surface modified materials had comparable contact angles to surfactant modified silicone rubber, all being significantly lower than the unmodified material. Surface modified materials however had a significantly higher tear strength and lower water uptake in comparison to surfactant modified materials. CONCLUSION: Argon plasma treatment followed by chemisorption of ethyleneoxy functional silanes proved an effective way of improving the wettability of an experimental silicone rubber maxillofacial prosthetic material without altering bulk properties

Effect of thermal cycling on denture base and autopolymerizing reline resins

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the fracture toughness (FT) of denture base and autopolymerizing reline resins, with and without thermocycling (T). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Specimens of each material (denture base acrylic resin - Lucitone 550 - L; autopolymerizing reline resins - Ufi Gel Hard-UH, Tokuyama Rebase II-TR, New Truliner- NT and Kooliner-K), were produced, notched and divided into two groups (n=10): CG (control group of autopolymerizing reline resins and L): FT tests were performed after polymerization; TG (thermocycled group): FT tests were performed after T (5ºC and 55ºC for 5,000 cycles). RESULTS: Results (MPa.m((1/2))) were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (p=0.05). L exhibited the highest FT mean values in both groups (CG - 2.33; TG - 2.17). For the CG groups, NT showed the highest FT (1.64) among the autopolymerizing reline resins, and K the lowest (1.04). After T, when the autopolymerizing reline resins were compared, a statistically significant difference in FT was found only between the NT (1.46) and TR (1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Thermocycling increased the FT of K and did not influence the FT of L, UH, TR and NT

Flexural strength of acrylic resin repairs processed by different methods: water bath, microwave energy and chemical polymerization

Denture fractures are common in daily practice, causing inconvenience to the patient and to the dentists. Denture repairs should have adequate strength, dimensional stability and color match, and should be easily and quickly performed as well as relatively inexpensive. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the flexural strength of acrylic resin repairs processed by different methods: warm water-bath, microwave energy, and chemical polymerization. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty rectangular specimens (31x10x2.5 mm) were made with warm water-bath acrylic resin (Lucitone 550) and grouped (15 specimens per group) according to the resin type used to make repair procedure: 1) specimens of warm water-bath resin (Lucitone 550) without repair (control group); 2) specimens of warm water-bath resin repaired with warm water-bath; 3) specimens of warm water-bath resin repaired with microwave resin (Acron MC); 4) specimens of warm water-bath resin repaired with autopolymerized acrylic resin (Simplex). Flexural strength was measured with the three-point bending in a universal testing machine (MTS 810 Material Test System) with load cell of 100 kgf under constant speed of 5 mm/min. Data were analyzed statistically by Kruskal-Wallis test (p<0.05). RESULTS: The control group showed the best result (156.04±1.82 MPa). Significant differences were found among repaired specimens and the results were decreasing as follows: group 3 (43.02±2.25 MPa), group 2 (36.21±1.20 MPa) and group 4 (6.74±0.85 MPa). CONCLUSION: All repaired specimens demonstrated lower flexural strength than the control group. Repairs with autopolymerized acrylic resin showed the lowest flexural strength

European survey on criteria of aesthetics for periodontal evaluation: The ESCAPE study

Objective: The ESCAPE multicentre survey was designed to (a) compare the agreement of three relevant aesthetic scoring systems among different centres, and (b) evaluate the reproducibility of each question of the questionnaires. / Materials and Methods: EFP centres (n = 14) were involved in an e‐survey. Forty‐two participants (28 teachers, 14 postgraduate students) were asked to score the one‐year aesthetic outcomes of photographs using the Before–After Scoring System (BASS), the Pink Esthetic Score (PES) and the Root coverage Esthetic Score (RES). Mean values of kappa statistics performed on each question were provided to resume global agreement of each method. / Results: Between teachers, a difference of kappa ≥ 0.41 (p = .01) was found for BASS (75%) and PES (57%). Similarly, RES (84%) and PES (57%) were different (p < .001). No difference was found between BASS (75%) and RES (84%). No difference was found between students, whatever the scoring system. Questions of each scoring system showed differences in their reproducibility. / Conclusions: The outcomes of this study indicate that BASS and RES scoring systems are reproducible tools to evaluate aesthetic after root coverage therapies between different centres. Among the various variables, lack of scar, degree of root coverage, colour match and gingival margin that follows the CEJ show the best reliability

Prevention and treatment of peri-implant diseases—The EFP S3 level clinical practice guideline

Background: The recently published Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment of stages I–IV periodontitis provided evidence-based recommendations for treating periodontitis patients, defined according to the 2018 classification. Peri-implant diseases were also re-defined in the 2018 classification. It is well established that both peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis are highly prevalent. In addition, peri-implantitis is particularly challenging to manage and is accompanied by significant morbidity. Aim: To develop an S3 level CPG for the prevention and treatment of peri-implant diseases, focusing on the implementation of interdisciplinary approaches required to prevent the development of peri-implant diseases or their recurrence, and to treat/rehabilitate patients with dental implants following the development of peri-implant diseases. Materials and Methods: This S3 level CPG was developed by the European Federation of Periodontology, following methodological guidance from the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation process. A rigorous and transparent process included synthesis of relevant research in 13 specifically commissioned systematic reviews, evaluation of the quality and strength of evidence, formulation of specific recommendations, and a structured consensus process involving leading experts and a broad base of stakeholders. Results: The S3 level CPG for the prevention and treatment of peri-implant diseases culminated in the recommendation for implementation of various different interventions before, during and after implant placement/loading. Prevention of peri-implant diseases should commence when dental implants are planned, surgically placed and prosthetically loaded. Once the implants are loaded and in function, a supportive peri-implant care programme should be structured, including periodical assessment of peri-implant tissue health. If peri-implant mucositis or peri-implantitis are detected, appropriate treatments for their management must be rendered. Conclusion: The present S3 level CPG informs clinical practice, health systems, policymakers and, indirectly, the public on the available and most effective modalities to maintain healthy peri-implant tissues, and to manage peri-implant diseases, according to the available evidence at the time of publication