Refine
Document Type
- Article (6)
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (6)
Keywords
- Cementation (1)
- Ceramic (1)
- IPS e.max system (1)
- Minimal invasive (1)
- Monolithic crown (1)
- OHIP-G14 (1)
- OHRQoL (1)
- Zirconia (1)
- attachment (1)
- ball (1)
Institute
- Medizin (6)
Programele computerizate au un rol indiscutabil în atingerea unor standarde ridicate în procesul educațional. Pe de altă parte acestea sunt instrumente eficiente în identificarea particularităților cazurilor clinice, evaluarea acestora în conformitate cu indicii clinico-biologici specifici. În timpul procesului didactic, simularea are un rol esenţial, ca o prefaţă la procedurile practice care formează abilităţile practice pe fiecare entitate clinică în medicina dentară.
Purpose: All-ceramic restorations required extensive tooth preparation. The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate a minimally invasive preparation and thickness of monolithic zirconia crowns, which would provide sufficient mechanical endurance and strength.
Materials and methods: Crowns with thickness of 0.2 mm (group 0.2, n=32) or of 0.5 mm (group 0.5, n=32) were milled from zirconia and fixed with resin-based adhesives (groups 0.2A, 0.5A) or zinc phosphate cements (groups 0.2C, 0.5C). Half of the samples in each subgroup (n=8) underwent thermal cycling and mechanical loading (TCML)(TC: 5℃ and 55℃, 2×3,000 cycles, 2 min/cycle; ML: 50 N, 1.2×106 cycles), while the other samples were stored in water (37℃/24 h). Survival rates were compared (Kaplan-Maier). The specimens surviving TCML were loaded to fracture and the maximal fracture force was determined (ANOVA; Bonferroni; α=.05). The fracture mode was analyzed.
Results: In both 0.5 groups, all crowns survived TCML, and the comparison of fracture strength among crowns with and without TCML showed no significant difference (P=.628). Four crowns in group 0.2A and all of the crowns in group 0.2C failed during TCML. The fracture strength after 24 hours of the cemented 0.2 mm-thick crowns was significantly lower than that of adhesive bonded crowns. All cemented crowns provided fracture in the crown, while about 80% of the adhesively bonded crowns fractured through crown and die.
Conclusion: 0.5 mm thick monolithic crowns possessed sufficient strength to endure physiologic performance, regardless of the type of cementation. Fracture strength of the 0.2 mm cemented crowns was too low for clinical application.
he aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of controlled intraoral grinding and polishing on the roughness of full-contour zirconia compared to classical veneered zirconia. Thirty bar-shaped zirconia specimens were fabricated and divided into two groups (n=15). Fifteen specimens (group 1) were glazed and 15 specimens (group 2) were veneered with feldspathic ceramic and then glazed. Prior to grinding, maximum roughness depth (Rmax) values were measured using a profilometer, 5 times per specimen. Simulated clinical grinding and polishing were performed on the specimens under water coolant for 15 s and 2 N pressure. For grinding, NTI diamonds burs with grain sizes of 20 µm, 10 µm, and 7.5 µm were used sequentially. The ground surfaces were polished using NTI kits with coarse, medium and fine polishers. After each step, Rmax values were determined. Differences between groups were examined using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The roughness of group 1 was significantly lower than that of group 2. The roughness increased significantly after coarse grinding in both groups. The results after glazing were similar to those obtained after fine grinding for non-veneered zirconia. However, fine-ground veneered zirconia had significantly higher roughness than venerred, glazed zirconia. No significant difference was found between fine-polished and glazed zirconia, but after the fine polishing of veneered zirconia, the roughness was significantly higher than after glazing. It can be concluded that for full-contour zirconia, fewer defects and lower roughness values resulted after grinding and polishing compared to veneered zirconia. After polishing zirconia, lower roughness values were achieved compared to glazing; more interesting was that the grinding of glazed zirconia using the NTI three-step system could deliver smooth surfaces comparable to untreated glazed zirconia surfaces.
Background Titanium and titanium alloys are widely used for fabrication of dental implants. Since the material composition and the surface topography of a biomaterial play a fundamental role in osseointegration, various chemical and physical surface modifications have been developed to improve osseous healing. Zirconia-based implants were introduced into dental implantology as an altenative to titanium implants. Zirconia seems to be a suitable implant material because of its tooth-like colour, its mechanical properties and its biocompatibility. As the osseointegration of zirconia implants has not been extensively investigated, the aim of this study was to compare the osseous healing of zirconia implants with titanium implants which have a roughened surface but otherwise similar implant geometries. Methods Forty-eight zirconia and titanium implants were introduced into the tibia of 12 minipigs. After 1, 4 or 12 weeks, animals were sacrificed and specimens containing the implants were examined in terms of histological and ultrastructural techniques. Results Histological results showed direct bone contact on the zirconia and titanium surfaces. Bone implant contact as measured by histomorphometry was slightly better on titanium than on zirconia surfaces. However, a statistically significant difference between the two groups was not observed. Conclusion The results demonstrated that zirconia implants with modified surfaces result in an osseointegration which is comparable with that of titanium implants.
Locator® and ball attachments are well-established systems to attach overdentures to two inter-foraminal implants. This study aimed to evaluate differences between the two systems regarding prosthetic maintenance and patients' oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). Dental records of patients with a mandibular implant-retained overdenture were retrospectively analyzed. Prosthetic maintenance measures involving the denture suprastructure and attachment matrix and patrix were analyzed. Furthermore, the Oral Health Impact Profile-G14 (OHIP-G14) was used to evaluate OHRQoL. Results were analyzed by means of Kaplan–Meier analysis and Student's t- and log-rank tests. The records of 122 patients were evaluated. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis revealed a significant difference between ball attachments (Group B; n patients = 47) and Locator® attachments (Group L; n patients = 75) regarding the occurrence of denture fractures (p < 0.001) and events affecting the matrix (p = 0.028) and patrix (p = 0.030). Group L had a significantly lower total OHIP-G14 score than Group B (p = 0.002). The most common maintenance events were matrix-related and denture relining for both attachment systems. Group B required more maintenance measures than Group L. Moreover, patients in Group L had better OHRQoL than patients in Group B.
The IPS e.max system by Ivoclar Vivadent, offering a variety of products and indications, is widely used for all-ceramic restorations. We analyzed the clinical track record of these products in daily clinical practice, associating their restorative survival rate with various parameters to define recommendations for long-term stability. A total of 1058 full-coverage crowns and fixed partial dentures (FPDs) were evaluated retrospectively over up to 66.48 (37.05 ± 18.4) months. All were made of IPS e.max Press, IPS e.max CAD, IPS e.max Ceram or IPS e.max ZirPress and had been delivered by a private dental practice within three years. Uses not recommended by the manufacturer were also deliberately included. The five-year cumulative survival was 94.22% (i.e., 94.69% or 90.58% for glass-ceramic crowns or FDPs and 100% or 90.06% for zirconia-based crowns or FDPs). Significantly superior outcomes emerged for conventional vs. adhesive cementation and for vital vs. non-vital abutment teeth, but not for recommended vs. non-recommended uses. Caution is required in restoring non-vital teeth, but the spectrum of recommended uses should generally be reconsidered and expanded, given our finding of high survival and success rates for IPS e.max ceramics, even for uses not currently recommended by the manufacturer.