Search

Statement of problem: Compromised angulation of implants may result in abutment preparation that is less than ideal. Compromised abutment preparation may affect the retention of implant-retained crowns. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of 5 implant abutment designs on the retention of cement-retained crowns by varying the number and position of the axial walls. Material and methods: Five prefabricated abutments were attached to an implant analog and embedded in an acrylic resin block. The first abutment was left intact without modification. Axial walls were partially removed from the remaining abutments to produce abutments with 3 walls, 2 adjacent walls, 2 opposing walls, and 1 wall. Five crowns were made for each group. The screw access channel for the first abutment was completely filled with composite resin and the rest were partially filled. The retentive surface area of each abutment was calculated. Crowns were cemented with zinc phosphate cement. Tensile force was applied to separate the castings from the abutments. Peak load to dislodgment was recorded. A 1-way ANOVA was used to test for a significant difference followed by the Tukey Honestly Significant Difference test (α=.05). Results: The abutment with 2 opposing axial walls had significantly higher retention than that of all other groups (F=149.9, df =24, P<.001). The abutment with 3 walls exhibited the second highest retention and was significantly greater than abutments with 2 adjacent walls, 1, and 4 walls. Abutments with 2 adjacent walls and 1 wall were not significantly different from each other. The unmodified abutment with 4 walls exhibited the lowest retention despite having a large retentive surface area. Conclusions: The retention of cemented crowns on implant abutments is influenced by the number and position of axial walls. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Tooth caries is a carbohydrate-modified bacterial infectious disease, and recurrent caries is a frequent reason for restoration failure. The objective of this study was to develop a novel antibacterial composite using tetracalcium phosphate (TTCP) fillers and bis(2-methacryloyloxy-ethyl) dimethyl-ammonium bromide, which is a quaternary ammonium dimethacrylate (QADM). QADM was synthesized using 2-(N,N-dimethylamino)ethyl methacrylate and 2-bromoethyl methacrylate and incorporated into a resin. The resin was filled with 40% TTCP and 30% glass particles. The following QADM mass fractions in the composite were tested: 0%, 6%, 12%, and 18%. Streptococcus mutans biofilms were formed on the composites and the colony-forming units (CFUs), metabolic activity, and lactic acid production were measured. The TTCP-QADM composite had flexural strength and elastic modulus similar to those of two commercial composites (p > 0.1). Increasing the QADM content in TTCP composite greatly decreased the bacteria growth and biofilm matrix production. There were significantly more dead bacteria with increasing QADM content. TTCP composite containing 18% QADM had biofilm CFU, metabolic activity, and acid production about half of those without QADM. Inversely linear relationships were established between QADM mass fraction and S. mutans biofilm CFU, metabolic activity, and acid production, with correlation coefficients R(2) ≥ 0.98. In conclusion, TTCP-QADM composites were developed and the effect of QADM mass fraction on the antibacterial properties of the composite was determined for the first time. The novel TTCP-QADM composites possessing a strong antibacterial capability, together with calcium phosphate ion release and good mechanical properties, are promising for dental restorations to reduce biofilm growth and recurrent caries., (Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Purpose: Procera Alumina crowns are widely used; however, the effect of crown margin design on marginal fit is unknown. This study measured and compared the precision of fit of Procera Alumina crowns with two crown margin designs: all-porcelain versus alumina-supported margins., Materials and Methods: Sixteen noncarious extracted human premolars were prepared for Procera((R)) Alumina crowns with an internally rounded shoulder preparation. Impressions were made from all teeth, and master dies were poured with type IV dental stone. The specimens were randomly divided into two groups. Procera Alumina crowns were fabricated: eight crowns with circumferential porcelain-butt (all-porcelain) margins and eight crowns with coping (alumina-supported) margins (control). Precision of fit was measured at six points on each crown with a profilometer (profile projector). The data were statistically analyzed with an independent-samples t-test (alpha < 0.05)., Results: The mean marginal gap size (microm) of coping margins was 68.07 +/- 16.08 and of porcelain-butt margins was 101.29 +/- 43.71. There was no statistically significant difference (p= 0.065) of the marginal gap size between coping margins and porcelain-butt margins., Conclusion: The results of this study demonstrate that there was no statistically significant difference in the marginal fit of coping and porcelain-butt margins. Both margin designs are within clinically acceptable ranges. Therefore, clinicians may choose to use a coping margin, as it is less labor intensive and requires less time for fabrication, unless there is a specific high esthetic need for a porcelain-butt margin.

Statement of Problem: Although metal-ceramic restorations are widely used, there is a lack of information about how the fit is affected by margin designs., Purpose: This study measured and compared the precision of fit of metal-ceramic crowns with two margin designs., Material and Methods: Thirty-two extracted human premolar teeth were prepared for complete-coverage restorations with an internally rounded shoulder preparation. Impressions were made from all teeth, and master dies were poured with improved stone type V. MC crowns were fabricated with a porcelain-butt margin on the buccal aspect (n = 32) and a feather-edge metal margin on the lingual aspect (n = 32), which served as a control group. Precision of fit was measured three times at the mid-buccal and mid-lingual margins of each crown with a profilometer. The data were statistically analyzed with the paired t-test (alpha < .05)., Results: Mean marginal gap size of porcelain-butt margins was 27.93 microm (+/-15.84) and of feather-edge metal margins 42.43 microm (+/-24.12). The marginal gap size of feather-edge metal margins was statistically significantly greater than that of porcelain-butt margins (p = 0.0045)., Conclusion: The marginal fit of porcelain-butt margins was significantly better than that of feather-edge metal margins., Clinical Implications: Porcelain-butt margins in this study had a better marginal fit than feather-edge metal margins, and thus have given clinicians evidence to prefer the use of porcelain-butt margins.