-
Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational... 2020Dental implant is an effective and standardized treatment procedure in the healthcare setting. This study presents a comparison of dental implant reconstruction using... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Dental implant is an effective and standardized treatment procedure in the healthcare setting. This study presents a comparison of dental implant reconstruction using screw and cement. It explicitly reviews the studies concerning cement and screws dental implants to determine the efficiency of the two.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
A systematic review was conducted by comprehensively searching electronic literature. The keywords, such as "Screw versus Cement Retained Fixed Implant Supported Reconstructions," "Screw Retained Fixed Implant." "Cement Implant" and "Dental Implant" were used for article searching. Twelve studies were included based on the determined inclusion and exclusion criteria.
RESULTS
No significant difference was found between the screw-retained and cemented retained implant supported reconstructions. Dental implants are associated with complications leading to implant failure based on the type of restoration that is being used; cement-retained restoration and screw-retained restoration. The treatment selection must be based on the significance criteria and the tooth condition.
CONCLUSION
Screw-retained implant-supported reconstructions were found to pose less biological and technological complications. Retention of the tooth is more stable and functional when implantation is selected based on the efficiency of a treatment procedure.
PubMed: 32021476
DOI: 10.2147/CCIDE.S231070 -
Methods and Protocols Jan 2022The most used types of retention of implant-supported prostheses are screw-retained or cement-retained restorations. The advantages and disadvantages of both have been... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The most used types of retention of implant-supported prostheses are screw-retained or cement-retained restorations. The advantages and disadvantages of both have been identified by various authors over the years. However, cement-retained implant crowns and fixed partial dentures are among the most used types of restorations in implant prostheses, due to their aesthetic and clinical advantages. When cemented prostheses are made on implants, the problem of cement residues is important and often associated with biological implant pathologies. The objective of this research was to establish to what extent the techniques to reduce excess cement really affect the volume of cement residues.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This review was written following the PRISMA statement; a detailed search was carried out in three different electronic databases-PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. The inclusion criteria were prospective clinical studies, with at least 10 participants per group, and with at least 6 months of the follow-up period.
RESULTS
There have been many proposals for techniques supposed to reduce the amount of excess cement in the peri-implant sulcus and on the prosthetic components, but of these, which are exceptional in their in vitro capabilities, very few have been clinically validated, and this represents the real limitation and a great lack of knowledge regarding this topic. Three articles met the inclusion criteria, which were analyzed and compared, to obtain the information necessary for the purposes of the systematic review.
DISCUSSION
Extraoral cementation can reduce the excess cement, which, after a normal excess removal procedure, is, nevertheless, of such size that it does not affect the possibility of peri-implant pathologies developing. All these studies concluded that a small amount of cement residue is found in the gingival sulcus, and using eugenol-free oxide cements, the residues were only deposited on the metal surfaces, with a better peri-implant tissues health.
CONCLUSION
Despite the limitations of this study, it was possible to carefully analyze these characteristics and obtain valuable suggestions for daily clinical practice. Resinous cements are considered, due to the free monomers present in them, toxic for the soft tissues. The provisional zinc-oxide cements, also eugenol-free, represent the ideal choice. The different grades of retentive forces provided by these cements do not seem to have clinical effects on the decementation of restorations.
PubMed: 35076562
DOI: 10.3390/mps5010009 -
International Journal of Nanomedicine 2022Non-metallic nanomaterials do not stain enamel or dentin. Most have better biocompatibility than metallic nanomaterials do for management of dental caries. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Non-metallic nanomaterials do not stain enamel or dentin. Most have better biocompatibility than metallic nanomaterials do for management of dental caries.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study is to review the types, properties and potential uses of non-metallic nanomaterials systematically for managing dental caries.
METHODS
Two researchers independently performed a literature search of publications in English using PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. The keywords used were (nanoparticles OR nanocomposites OR nanomaterials) AND (caries OR tooth decay). They screened the titles and abstracts to identify potentially eligible publications of original research reporting non-metallic nanomaterials for caries management. Then, they retrieved and studied the full text of the identified publications for inclusion in this study.
RESULTS
Out of 2497 resulting publications, this study included 75 of those. The non-metallic nanomaterials used in these publications were categorized as biological organic nanomaterials (n=45), synthetic organic nanomaterials (n=15), carbon-based nanomaterials (n=13) and selenium nanomaterials (n=2). They inhibited bacteria growth and/or promoted remineralization. They could be incorporated in topical agents (29/75, 39%), dental adhesives (11/75, 15%), restorative fillers (4/75, 5%), dental sealant (3/75, 4%), oral drugs (3/75, 4%), toothpastes (2/75, 3%) and functional candies (1/75, 1%). Other publications (22/75, 29%) do not mention specific applications. However, most publications (67/75, 89%) were in vitro studies. Six publications (6/75, 8%) were animal studies, and only two publications (2/75, 3%) were clinical studies.
CONCLUSION
The literature showed non-metallic nanomaterials have antibacterial and/or remineralising properties. The most common type of non-metallic nanomaterials for caries management is organic nanomaterials. Non-metallic nanomaterials can be incorporated into dental sealants, toothpaste, dental adhesives, topical agents and even candies and drugs. However, the majority of the publications are in vitro studies, and only two publications are clinical studies.
Topics: Humans; Dental Caries; Dental Cements
PubMed: 36474525
DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S389038 -
Australian Dental Journal Sep 2015Carious affected dentine (CAD) represents a very common substrate in adhesive dentistry. Despite its ability to interact with adhesive systems, the intrinsic character... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Carious affected dentine (CAD) represents a very common substrate in adhesive dentistry. Despite its ability to interact with adhesive systems, the intrinsic character of CAD leads to lower bonding compared with sound dentine, regardless of the adhesive systems used. This low bonding may be more susceptible to leakage and hydrolysis of the interface by matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs). This systematic review aimed to determine current knowledge of CAD bonding, together with bond strength and MMP inhibitors' ability to prevent hybrid layer instability.
METHODS
MEDLINE/Pubmed, Scopus and The Cochrane Library databases were electronically searched for articles published from 1 January 1960 to 31 August 2014. Two reviewers independently screened and included papers according to predefined selection criteria.
RESULTS
The electronic searches identified 320 studies. After title, abstract and full-text examinations, 139 articles met the inclusion criteria. Data highlighted that a poor resin saturation of the already demineralized collagen matrix in CAD is strictly related to nanoleakage in interdiffusion and is the basis of the progressive decrease in strength with hydrolysis by MMPs. The use of mild self-etching systems seems to be the more accredited method to establish bonding in CAD. Inhibitors of MMPs may ensure better performance of CAD bonding, allowing undisturbed remineralization of the affected matrix.
CONCLUSIONS
CAD bonding needs further understanding and improvement, particularly to enhance the strength and durability of the hybrid layer.
Topics: Dental Bonding; Dental Caries; Dental Cements; Dental Leakage; Dentin; Humans; Matrix Metalloproteinase Inhibitors; Stress, Mechanical
PubMed: 25790344
DOI: 10.1111/adj.12309 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2016Orthodontic treatment involves using fixed or removable appliances (dental braces) to correct the positions of teeth. It has been shown that the quality of treatment... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Orthodontic treatment involves using fixed or removable appliances (dental braces) to correct the positions of teeth. It has been shown that the quality of treatment result obtained with fixed appliances is much better than with removable appliances. Fixed appliances are, therefore, favoured by most orthodontists for treatment. The success of a fixed orthodontic appliance depends on the metal attachments (brackets and bands) being attached securely to the teeth so that they do not become loose during treatment. Brackets are usually attached to the front and side teeth, whereas bands (metal rings that go round the teeth) are more commonly used on the back teeth (molars). A number of adhesives are available to attach bands to teeth and it is important to understand which group of adhesives bond most reliably, as well as reducing or preventing dental decay during the treatment period.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of the adhesives used to attach bands to teeth during fixed appliance treatment, in terms of:(1) how often the bands come off during treatment; and(2) whether they protect the banded teeth against decay during fixed appliance treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
The following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (searched 2 June 2016), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 5) in the Cochrane Library (searched 2 June 2016), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 2 June 2016) and EMBASE Ovid (1980 to 2 June 2016). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and controlled clinical trials (RCTs and CCTs) (including split-mouth studies) of adhesives used to attach orthodontic bands to molar teeth were selected. Patients with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) who had bands attached to molars were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
All review authors were involved in study selection, validity assessment and data extraction without blinding to the authors, adhesives used or results obtained. All disagreements were resolved by discussion.
MAIN RESULTS
Five RCTs and three CCTs were identified as meeting the review's inclusion criteria. All the included trials were of split-mouth design. Four trials compared chemically cured zinc phosphate and chemically cured glass ionomer; three trials compared chemically cured glass ionomer cement with light cured compomer; one trial compared chemically cured glass ionomer with a chemically cured glass phosphonate. Data analysis was often inappropriate within the studies meeting the inclusion criteria.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient high quality evidence with regard to the most effective adhesive for attaching orthodontic bands to molar teeth. Further RCTs are required.
Topics: Adhesives; Adolescent; Clinical Trials as Topic; Dental Bonding; Dental Caries; Dental Cements; Female; Glass Ionomer Cements; Humans; Male; Molar; Orthodontic Brackets; Orthodontics; Resin Cements; Young Adult; Zinc Phosphate Cement
PubMed: 27779317
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004485.pub4 -
Arthroplasty (London, England) Feb 2021Methyl methacrylate (MMA) is commonly used in the fields of dentistry and orthopaedic surgery. However, there remain concerns for the occupational hazards of MMA,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Methyl methacrylate (MMA) is commonly used in the fields of dentistry and orthopaedic surgery. However, there remain concerns for the occupational hazards of MMA, particularly during pregnancy and breastfeeding.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of studies on effects that MMA may have in pregnancy in the context of exposure during orthopaedic surgery and dentistry. Review articles, studies lacking statistical data, single case reports and other evidence level V studies were excluded.
RESULTS
Nine studies were included. One basic science study demonstrated an increase in neuronal cell lysis and shrunken cell bodies when neocortical neurons were exposed to MMA monomer. Three animal studies exposed pregnant rodents to MMA via intraperitoneal injection or inhalation. Exposed fetuses in two studies had an increase in gross abnormalities such as hemangiomas, while there was no increase in teratologic effects in the third study. In dental workers exposed to MMA, two retrospective cohort studies did not find a statistically significant increase in birth defects or miscarriage. After exposure to MMA during total joint arthroplasty, two studies found that MMA levels were undetectable in the mothers' serum or breast milk. One study measuring the airborne levels of MMA during simulated joint arthroplasty found that concentrations never exceeded 1% of the recommended limit set forth by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
CONCLUSIONS
Potential teratologic effects of MMA cannot be excluded by existing evidence. However, the typical MMA exposure levels for dental and orthopaedic personnel appear to be substantially less than currently proposed exposure limits.
PubMed: 35236460
DOI: 10.1186/s42836-020-00059-z -
International Journal of Clinical... 2021Knowledge of the cytotoxicity and bioactivity of endodontic materials may assist in understanding their ability to promote dental pulp stem cell activity and pulp... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Knowledge of the cytotoxicity and bioactivity of endodontic materials may assist in understanding their ability to promote dental pulp stem cell activity and pulp healing in primary teeth.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This systematic review was carried out by searching the electronic databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane reviews for the articles published between January 2000 and December 2018 using the appropriate MeSH keywords. An independent investigator evaluated the abstracts and titles for possible inclusion, as per the stipulated inclusion and exclusion criteria. The topics considered for extracting data from each study were: cell lineage, cytotoxicity assay used, and type of material tested.
RESULTS
Seven eligible studies were selected for assessing the quality of evidence on the bioactivity of bioactive endodontic cements (BECs) (1 human cell line, 2 animal cell lines, and 4 , animal, and human studies) and 13 studies were selected for reviewing the quality of evidence on cytotoxicity (7 human cell lines, 4 animal cell lines, and 2 animal model studies). Very limited studies had been conducted on the bioactivity of materials other than mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA). With regards to cytotoxicity, the studies were diverse and most of the studies were based on MTT assay. Mineral trioxide aggregate is the most frequently used as well as studied root-end filling cement, and the literature evidence corroborated its reduced cytotoxicity and enhanced bioavailability.
CONCLUSION
There was a lack of sufficient evidence to arrive at a consensus on the ideal material with minimal cytotoxicity and optimal bioactivity. More focused human/cell line-based studies are needed on the available root filling materials.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
The present systematic review provides an update on the available literature evidence on the cytotoxicity and bioactivity of various BECs including MTAs and their influence on the different cells with respect to their composition and strength.
HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE
Maru V, Dixit U, Patil RSB, Cytotoxicity and Bioactivity of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and Bioactive Endodontic Type Cements: A Systematic Review. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(1):30-39.
PubMed: 34326580
DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1880 -
Materials (Basel, Switzerland) Apr 2023Self-adhesive resin cements (SARCs) are used because of their mechanical properties, ease of cementation protocols, and lack of requirements for acid conditioning or... (Review)
Review
Self-adhesive resin cements (SARCs) are used because of their mechanical properties, ease of cementation protocols, and lack of requirements for acid conditioning or adhesive systems. SARCs are generally dual-cured, photoactivated, and self-cured, with a slight increase in acidic pH, allowing self-adhesiveness and increasing resistance to hydrolysis. This systematic review assessed the adhesive strength of SARC systems luted to different substrates and computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) ceramic blocks. The PubMed/MedLine and Science Direct databases were searched using the Boolean formula [((dental or tooth) AND (self-adhesive) AND (luting or cement) AND CAD-CAM) NOT (endodontics or implants)]. Of the 199 articles obtained, 31 were selected for the quality assessment. Lava Ultimate (resin matrix filled with nanoceramic) and Vita Enamic (polymer-infiltrated ceramic) blocks were the most tested. Rely X Unicem 2 was the most tested resin cement, followed by Rely X Unicem > Ultimate > U200, and μTBS was the test most used. The meta-analysis confirmed the substrate-dependent adhesive strength of SARCs, with significant differences between them and between SARCs and conventional resin-based adhesive cement (α < 0.05). SARCs are promising. However, one must be aware of the differences in the adhesive strengths. An appropriate combination of materials must be considered to improve the durability and stability of restorations.
PubMed: 37109832
DOI: 10.3390/ma16082996 -
Brazilian Oral Research Mar 2018This study aimed to compare the longevity of different conventional restorative materials placed in posterior primary teeth. This systematic review was conducted... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
This study aimed to compare the longevity of different conventional restorative materials placed in posterior primary teeth. This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA statement and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016035775). A comprehensive electronic search without date or language restrictions was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) and Clinical Trials databases up to January 2017, selecting randomized clinical trials that assessed the longevity of at least two different conventional restorative materials performed in primary molars. Seventeen studies were included in this systematic review. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed and relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. Restorations of primary molars with conventional glass ionomer cement showed increased risk of failure than compomer, resin-modified glass ionomer cement, amalgam, and composite resin. Risk of bias was low in most studies (45.38% of all items across studies). Pediatric dentists should avoid conventional glass ionomer cement for restoring primary molars.
Topics: Dental Caries; Dental Materials; Dental Restoration Failure; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Publication Bias; Risk Assessment; Tooth, Deciduous; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29513886
DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0010 -
The Saudi Dental Journal Jul 2023Lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDC) restorations exhibit microorganism infiltration, recurrent caries, pulpal lesions, periodontal inflammation, and cement exposure... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDC) restorations exhibit microorganism infiltration, recurrent caries, pulpal lesions, periodontal inflammation, and cement exposure to the oral environment over time. All these factors lead to restoration failure. This systematic review aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of LDC full-coverage crowns (FCC) in permanent teeth compared with those of other full-coverage restoration materials.
MATERIALS & METHODS
Search strategies were developed for four databases: Web of Science, OVID, PubMed, and Scopus. Data extraction and quality appraisals were performed by two independent reviewers. Data on the presence of caries, post-operative sensitivity, and periodontal changes were extracted from the included clinical studies. In addition to the outcome measures, data on the sample size, study groups, method of restoration fabrication, type of impression, and type of abutment were recorded.
RESULTS
We retrieved 3989 records for the title and abstract screening. Of these, 19 clinical studies met the inclusion criteria. The overall quality of the included studies indicates a low risk of bias. Most studies reported no pulpal involvement, recurrent caries, or post-operative sensitivity and presented a favorable periodontal response after the cementation of LDC-FCC during different follow-up periods.
CONCLUSION
Based on the endodontic and periodontic clinical responses of natural tooth abutments and their supporting periodontium, LDC-FCC can be considered a clinically successful restorative option.
PubMed: 37520610
DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2023.05.012