Restorative Dentistry

This case shows an excellent esthetic treatment outcome using implant-retained crowns replacing maxillary laterals and canines in hypodontia patient with unusual incidence of spontaneous diastema closure after the placement of implants. To our knowledge, this is the first case report showing maxillary midline diastema closure after implant placement.

This case shows an excellent esthetic treatment outcome using implant-retained crowns replacing maxillary laterals and canines in hypodontia patient with unusual incidence of spontaneous diastema closure after the placement of implants. To our knowledge, this is the first case report showing maxillary midline diastema closure after implant placement.

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the potential of concentrated fluoride varnishes to reduce enamel loss from repeated cycles of citric acid erosion and toothbrush abrasion in vitro. Methods: Polished human enamel samples were exposed to fluoride varnishes: Bifluorid10 ® (NaF&CaF 2-45200 ppmF), Duraphat ® (NaF 22600 ppmF), Fluor-Protector ® (difluorsilane 1000 ppmF) and a control coating of copal ether varnish (0 ppmF) group and a deionized water group. For each group of 16 samples, nine cycles of erosion and nine cycles of erosion-abrasion [1 cycle = erosion (0.3% citric acid, pH 3.2, 5 min) + artificial saliva (1 h, pH 7.0) + abrasion (120 linear strokes in artificial saliva from Oral B medium soft brushes 300 g loading]. The change in the enamel surface was evaluated using optical profilometry. Results: Duraphat ® and Bifluorid10 ® applications had a median (IQR) step height of 4.21 um (1.59) and 5.01 um (1.02). This was statistically significantly less than Fluor-Protector ® 6.83 um (1.25), copal ether 7.22 um (1.97) and water 7.39 um (1.96) (p < 0.001). For erosion-abrasion, both Duraphat ® and Bifluorid ® had statistically lower step heights than the other products (p < 0.01). Conclusions: The action of fluoride in a range of single-application topical varnishes was effective in reducing enamel wear from erosion and erosion-abrasion in this laboratory study.

Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine in vitro using a synchrotron radiation-based μCT (SRCT) whether rotary and reciprocating nickel titanium (NiTi) instrumentations lead to the formation of dentine microcracks. Material and methods Fourteen extracted human molars were obtained with ethical approval. Seven distobuccal roots of the maxillary molars and seven mesial roots of the mandibular molars were assigned to two experimental groups: (A) prepared with rotary Pro Taper instrumentation (n=6) and (B) reciprocating WaveOne (n=6). Irrigation with 1 % NaOCl and 17 % EDTA solutions was carried out. The remaining roots served as positive control with induced fractures (group C). SRCT was used to scan all samples pre and post-operatively. An imaging software was used to determine the number and length of microcracks. Statistical analyses weighed differences between pre and post-instrumentation and between shaping methods. Results A significant increase in the number and length of microcracks was detected post-shaping. No significant difference between rotary and reciprocating instrumentation was observed.

A comparison of cone beam computed tomography and periapical radiography for the detection of vertical root fractures in nonendodontically treated teeth. International Endodontic Journal. the fractures appeared to have an impact on the diagnostic accuracy of CBCT as the detection of VRFs of ≥50 lm was significantly higher than those of <50 lm. The detection of complete fractures was significantly higher for all systems than that of incomplete fractures.

Barnes JJ, Patel S, Mannocci F. Why do general dental practitioners refer to a specific specialist endodontist in practice? International Endodontic Journal, 44, 21-32, 2011. Aims To identify the factors that influence the decision of general dental practitioners (GDPs) in Northern Ireland to refer to a specific specialist endodontist. Methodology A self-administered questionnaire was sent to 220 GDPs in Northern Ireland. The questionnaire comprised questions on demographic characteristics, pattern of practice, pattern of referral and factors influencing the decision to refer to a specific specialist endodontist in practice. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics and the chi-squared (v 2 ) test at the 0.05 level of significance. Results The response rate was 81%. All respondents stated that they carried out root canal treatment, and the majority (83%) stated that they also carried out root canal retreatment. A minority of respondents (11%) stated that they carried out surgical endodontics. These individuals were more likely to be men, hold a postgraduate qualification, or work in a rural location. The majority of respondents (94%) referred patients with an endodontic problem. These individuals were more likely to be women, not hold a postgraduate qualification, or not carry out surgical endodontics. GDPs indicated a preference for referring to a specialist endodontist in practice over other treatment providers. Factors considered to be of importance in the decision to refer to a specialist endodontist in practice included the practice location of, reputation of, communication with and patient management by the specialist endodontist. The greatest proportion of respondents ranked short waiting time for a consultation as the top promoter when referring to a specific specialist endodontist in practice. Conclusion The decision by GDPs to refer to a specific specialist endodontist in practice is multifactorial and influenced by several factors independent from the nature of endodontic disease. In Northern Ireland, the top promoter for referring to a specific specialist endodontist in practice was a relatively short waiting time for a consultation.