Alex J. Delgado

Survival rate of lithium disilicate restorations at 4 years: A retrospective study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Ceramic restorations are frequently being placed due to the esthetic demand and the cost of noble metals that has increased considerably. One major disadvantage of ceramic restoration is failure of the material due to fracture by crack propagation. In vitro studies are of little clinical significance and in vivo studies are too short to support clinical success. PURPOSE The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the failure rate of lithium disilicate restorations (monolithic and layered) at 4 years. MATERIAL AND METHODS Data were collected over 45 months from 2 commercial laboratories. Restorations were categorized into monolithic restorations and layered restorations. Each category was further classified into complete coverage single crowns, fixed dental prostheses, e.max veneers, and inlay/onlay restorations. Failure rates were compared and analyzed using Chi-square (α=.05). RESULTS A total of 21,340 restorations were evaluated in this study and included 15,802 monolithic restorations and 5538 layered restorations. The failure rate for single crown monolithic restorations was 0.91% and was 1.83% for single crown layered restorations. For fixed dental prostheses, 4.55% of monolithic restorations failed. For e.max veneers, 1.3% of monolithic veneers fractured and 1.53% of layered veneers fractured. Of the inlay/onlay restorations group, 1.01% of monolithic restorations fractured. CONCLUSION In the short term (45 months), restorations fabricated with the lithium disilicate material (IPS e.max) had relatively low fracture rates. Layered single crowns fractured at approximately 2 times the rate of monolithic crowns.

Effect of Finishing Techniques on the Marginal Integrity of Resin-Based Composite and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Restoration

UNLABELLED The purpose of this study was to evaluate the marginal integrity of resin-based composite (RBC and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) restorations as a function of finishing technique and location of the tooth. Forty extracted third molars were assigned to four groups (N = 10) according to finishing instruments (aluminum oxide discs, fluted carbides, fine diamonds, and coarse diamond). Each specimen received standardized Class V preparations on the facial and lingual surfaces with occlusal margins on enamel and gingival margins on dentin. Each preparation was randomly assigned to be restored with either RBC or RMGIC. Specimens were finished with standardized pressure at approximately 0.16 N and evaluated at a magnification of 600× using an environmental scanning electron microscope. Occlusal and gingival margins were analyzed using an imaging software, and means for all measured gaps were calculated. Data were analyzed with a factorial analysis of variance. All possible two-way interactions were included, and the level of significance was set at 0.05. There were no statistically significant differences among the four types of finishing instruments used in the study. RBC-restored specimens exhibited significantly smaller mean marginal gaps (1.70-7.56 μm) than RMGI-restored specimens (5.24-14.24 μm) in enamel and dentin margins, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between enamel and dentin with regard to marginal gap formation. Under the conditions of this study, marginal gap formation was not affected by finishing technique. RBC margins exhibited significantly less marginal gap than RMGI margins, whereas enamel margins resulted in significantly less marginal gap than did dentin margins. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Multiple factors can affect the marginal integrity and the longevity of direct restorations. From these, the finishing and polishing techniques are critical steps that are under the clinicians control, and proper finishing and polishing techniques should be applied for avoiding introduction of stress to the margin of the restoration. It seems that instrumentation do not play a significant role, as much as the restorative material and the substrate to bond.

pH and Erosive Potential of Commonly Used Oral Moisturizers

PURPOSE To measure the pH values of commonly used oral moisturizers and to evaluate their erosive potential using a gravimetric analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS A pH analysis was performed for seven commercially available oral moisturizers using a calibrated pH meter. The pH recording was repeated three times, from three different bottles each of the same product. The gravimetric analysis was performed by submerging human dentin blocks in 5 ml of each of the moisturizers for a total of 2 weeks, with gravimetric measurements made at baseline, 24 hours, 48 hours, 96 hours, 1 week, and 15 days. Tap water was used as positive control and citric acid as the negative control. The erosive potential was descriptively analyzed, and a Spearman correlation coefficient was used to assess the relationship between the erosive potential and the pH values. RESULTS The average pH values are as follows: Oasis, 6.3, Bioténe Moisturizing Mouth Spray, 6.1, CTx2 Spray, 9.1, Mouth Kote, 3.0, Thayers, 6.3, Bioténe Oral Balance, 6.6, Rain, 7.1, tap water 6.99, and citric acid 1.33. The results (% of tooth structure lost) of the gravimetric analysis were as follows: Mouth Kote, 9.6%, Bioténe Moisturizing Mouth Spray, 4.6%, Oasis, 3.2%, Thayers, 2.0%, Bioténe Oral Balance, 0.0%, Rain, 0.0%, CTx2 Spray, 0.0%, tap water 0.0%, and citric acid 18.8%. There was a significant negative correlation between the pH values and the erosive potential (r(s) = -0.73; P ≤ 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS There is large variation in the composition and pH values of commonly used oral moisturizers, and there is a strong correlation between pH values and erosive potential of commonly used oral moisturizers. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Patients with dry mouth are at increased risk for erosion and root caries. Oral moisturizing agents are often prescribed for patients with hyposalivation to be used as needed for symptomatic relief. This study shows that there is large variation in the pH values and erosive potential of commonly used oral moisturizing agents.

Abfraction lesions: etiology, diagnosis, and treatment options

Abfraction is a type of noncarious cervical lesion (NCCL) characterized by loss of tooth tissues with different clinical appearances. Evidence supports that abfraction lesions, as any NCCLs, have a multifactorial etiology. Particularly, the cervical wear of abfraction can occur as a result of normal and abnormal tooth function and may also be accompanied by pathological wear, such as abrasion and erosion. The interaction between chemical, biological, and behavioral factors is critical and helps to explain why some individuals exhibit more than one type of cervical wear mechanism than others. In an era of personalized dentistry, patient risk factors for NCCLs must be identified and addressed before any treatment is performed. Marked variations exist in dental practice concerning the diagnosis and management of these lesions. The lack of understanding about the prognosis of these lesions with or without intervention may be a major contributor to variations in dentists’ management decisions. This review focuses on the current knowledge and available treatment strategies for abfraction lesions. By recognizing that progressive changes in the cervical area of the tooth are part of a physiologically dynamic process that occurs with aging, premature and unnecessary intervention can be avoided. In cases of asymptomatic teeth, where tooth vitality and function are not compromised, abfraction lesions should be monitored for at least 6 months before any invasive procedure is planned. In cases of abfraction associated with gingival recession, a combined restorative-surgical approach may be performed. Restorative intervention and occlusal adjustment are not indicated as treatment options to prevent further tooth loss or progression of abfraction. The clinical decision to restore abfraction lesions may be based on the need to replace form and function or to relieve hypersensitivity of severely compromised teeth or for esthetic reasons.

Fixed Restorative Materials

The clinical basis for selection of any restorative material should be based on scientific evidence and clinical experience. It is necessary to evaluate the information gathered from randomized clinical studies, where experimental materials are compared with a control group or a systematic review that answers a specific question relating to the material. It is important that the clinician takes into consideration factors that will affect the longevity of the restoration.

Caries Risk Assessment, Remineralizing, and Desensitizing Strategies in Preventive-Restorative Dentistry

In the spirit of primum non nocere, latin for first do no harm, it is our responsibility as dentists to correctly evaluate our patients and counsel them regarding their disease prior to treating them surgically. We must also critically evaluate dental materials for treating or arresting dental caries as these become available and efficacious in the years to come.

Acidic oral moisturizers with pH below 6.7 may be harmful to teeth depending on formulation: a short report

Xerostomia affects 30% of the population and manifests as a side effect of medications, systemic diseases, or cancer therapy. Oral moisturizers are prescribed to overcome the ailments of dry mouth and its symptoms. It is imperative that these products help to restore hyposalivation and that they do not present any secondary effect that can harm oral health. It has been shown in the literature that some oral moisturizers may have an erosive potential due to their acidic pH, which is below the critical pH of dentin and enamel. The purpose of this paper was to make clinicians aware of the erosive potential of these products and make recommendations to manufactures for future formulations avoiding acidic pH. For this reason, care should be taken to formulate these products with safe pH values for both enamel and root dentin which, based on specific formulation should be around 6.7 or higher.