OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the degradation effects of each dietary solvent on the microhardness of the different CAD/CAM dental composites and to observe the degradation effects of dietary solvent on the inorganic elements of the dental composites investigated.
METHODS: Fifty specimens with dimensions 12 mm x 14 mm x 1.5 mm were prepared for direct composite (Filtek Z350 XT [FZ]), indirect composite (Shofu Ceramage [CM]), and three CAD/CAM composites (Lava Ultimate [LU], Cerasmart [CS], and Vita Enamic [VE]). The specimens were randomly divided into 5 groups (n = 10) and conditioned for 1-week at 37°C in the following: air (control), distilled water, 0.02 N citric acid, 0.02 N lactic acid and 50% ethanol-water solution. Subsequently, the specimens were subjected to microhardness test (KHN) using Knoop hardness indenter. Air (control) and representative postconditioning specimens with the lowest mean KHN value for each material were analyzed using energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX). Statistical analysis was done using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Bonferroni test at a significance level of p = 0.05.
RESULTS: Mean KHN values ranged from 39.7 ± 2.7 kg/mm2 for FZ conditioned in 50% ethanol-water solution to 79.2 ± 3.4 kg/mm2 for VE conditioned in air (control). With exception to LU, significant differences were observed between materials and dietary solvents for other dental composites investigated. EDX showed stable peaks of the inorganic elements between air (control) and representative postconditioning specimens.
CONCLUSIONS: The microhardness of dental composites was significantly affected by dietary solvents, except for one CAD/CAM composite [LU]. However, no changes were observed in the inorganic elemental composition of dental composites between air (control) and 1-week postconditioning.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate crestal bone loss (CBL) around zirconia dental implants and clinical periimplant inflammatory parameters.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The focus question addressed was, "Do zirconia implants maintain crestal bone levels and periimplant soft tissue health?" Databases were searched for articles from 1977 through September 2014 with different combinations of the following MeSH terms: "dental implants," "zirconium," "alveolar bone loss," "periodontal attachment loss," "periodontal pocket," "periodontal index." Letters to the editor, case reports, commentaries, review articles, and articles published in languages other than English were excluded.
RESULTS: Thirteen clinical studies were included. In 8 of the studies, the CBL around zirconia implants was comparable between baseline and follow-up. In the other 5 studies, the CBL around zirconia implants was significantly higher at follow-up. Among the studies that used titanium implants as controls, 2 studies showed significantly higher CBL around zirconia implants, and in 1 study, the CBL around zirconia and titanium implants was comparable. The reported implant survival rates for zirconia implants ranged between 67.6% and 100%. Eleven studies selectively reported the periimplant inflammatory parameters.
CONCLUSIONS: Because of the variations in study design and methodology, it was difficult to reach a consensus regarding the efficacy of zirconia implants in maintaining crestal bone levels and periimplant soft tissue health.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Candida albicans, Streptococcus mutans, and Staphylococcus aureus were incubated with modified and unmodified silicone groups (N = 35) for 30 days at 37°C. The counts of viable microorganisms in the accumulating biofilm layer were determined and converted to cfu/cm2 unit surface area. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) was used to evaluate the microbial adhesion. Statistical analysis was performed using t-test, one-way ANOVA, and post hoc tests as indicated.
RESULTS: Significant differences in microbial adhesion were observed between modified and unmodified silicone elastomers after the cells were incubated for 30 days (p < 0.001). SEM showed evident differences in microbial adhesion on modified silicone elastomer compared with unmodified silicone elastomer.
CONCLUSIONS: Surface modification of silicone elastomer yielding a smoother and less porous surface showed lower adhesion of different microorganisms than observed on unmodified surfaces.
METHODS: Silanated, titanated and pure NBT at 5% were incorporated in PMMA matrix. Neat PMMA matrix served as a control. NBT was sonicated in MMA prior to mixing with the PMMA. Curing was carried out using a water bath at 75°C for 1.5h and then at 100°C for 30min. NBT was characterised via Fourier transform-infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) and Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) analysis before and after surface modification. The porosity and fracture toughness of the PMMA nanocomposites (n=6, for each formulation and test) were also evaluated.
RESULTS: NBT was successfully functionalised by the coupling agents. The TCA exhibited the lowest percentage of porosity (0.09%), whereas silane revealed 0.53% porosity. Statistically significant differences in fracture toughness were observed among the fracture toughness values of the tested samples (p<0.05). While the fracture toughness of untreated samples was reduced by 8%, an enhancement of 25% was achieved after titanation. In addition, the fracture toughness of the titanated samples was higher than the silanated ones by 10%.
CONCLUSION: Formation of a monolayer on the surface of TCA enhanced the NBT dispersion, however agglomeration of silanated NBT was observed due to insufficient coverage of NBT surface. Such behaviour led to reducing the porosity level and improving fracture toughness of titanated NBT/PMMA composites. Thus, TCA seemed to be more effective than silane.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Minimising the porosity level could have the potential to reduce fungus growth on denture base resin to be hygienically accepTable Such enhancements obtained with Ti-NBT could lead to promotion of the composites' longevity.