Search

Background and Objectives: Nowadays, indication of composite materials for various clinical situations has increased significantly. However, in the oral environment, these biomaterials are subjected (abnormal occlusal forces, external bleaching, consumption of carbonated beverages, etc.) to changes in their functional and mechanical behavior when indicated primarily for patients with masticatory habits. The study aimed to recreate in our lab one of the most common situations nowadays—in-office activity of a young patient suffering from specific parafunctional occlusal stress (bruxism) who consumes acidic beverages and is using at-home dental bleaching. Materials and Methods: Sixty standardized class II cavities were restored with two nanohybrid biocomposite materials (Filtek Z550, 3M ESPE, and Evetric, Ivoclar Vivadent); the restored teeth were immersed in sports drinks and carbonated beverages and exposed to an at-home teeth bleaching agent. The samples were subjected to parafunctional mechanical loads using a dual-axis chewing simulator. A grading evaluation system was conducted to assess the defects of the restorations using different examination devices: a CBCT, a high-resolution digital camera, and periapical X-rays. Results: Before mechanical loading, the CBCT analysis revealed substantially fewer interfacial defects between the two resin-based composites (p > 0.05), whereas, after bruxism forces simulation, significantly more defects were identified (p < 0.05). Qualitative examination of the restorations showed more occlusal defects for the Evetric than the other nanohybrid composite. Conclusions: There were different behaviors observed regarding the studied nanocomposites when simulation of parafunctional masticatory forces was associated with aging treatments.

Background: Fixed retainers assist in maintaining the outcomes of orthodontic treatment. Fixed retention may be affected by bruxism. Objective: Evaluate two adhesives (an ormocer and a flowable composite) used for fixed orthodontic retention in simulated bruxism settings, compared to regular mastication, using a dual axis chewing simulator. Methods: Eighty human teeth were used. Periodontal tissues were simulated and exposed to 120,000 mechanical cycles, corresponding to 6 months of clinical service. Each set of two teeth was supplied with a pre-shaped, fixed, multi-braided, stainless steel wire retainer, in 1.5 cm portions, to establish passive contact with the lingual surface of the teeth. The Adhesive Remnant Index (ARI) was used to evaluate the shear bond strength. A stereomicroscope was used to assess the micro-infiltration. Results: There was no significant difference in the mean value of micro-infiltration between adhesives in the mastication group but in the bruxism group. During testing, one composite sample (ARI score 1) was broken in the mastication group, while three ormocer samples (ARI score 2) and one composite sample (ARI score 1) were broken in the bruxism group. Conclusions: The mean value for micro-infiltration in composite (0.31) was more than double that in ormocer (0.13).

Background and objectives: The aim was to evaluate the current literature on the influence of inflammatory bowel disease (ulcerative colitis/Crohn’s disease) in dental implant osseointegration in human clinical studies. Materials and methods: This review was conducted under the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were electronic screened to find relevant articles published until October 2021. The inclusion criteria consisted of human clinical studies that reported the use of dental implant in patients diagnosed with inflammatory bowel disease. Risk of bias was assessed according to The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology criteria. Results: A total of 786 studies were identified from databases. Of these, six studies were included in the review and reported the use of implants in patients with Crohn’s disease. No articles were available for ulcerative colitis. Included articles indicated that Crohn’s disease may determine early and late implant failure. Besides Crohn’s disease, several patients presented associated risk factors and systemic disease that determined implant failure. Conclusions: The presence of clinical studies on the influence of IBD in implant therapy is low. When recommending an implant therapy to IBD patients, the multidisciplinary team should be aware of side effects and a close collaboration between members of this team is necessary. More data are needed to sustain the effect of IBD on implant therapy.