No abstract

Purpose To evaluate the rebonding strength of ceramics to titanium alloy after disassembling by heat treatment. Materials and Methods A total of 40 titanium alloy (titanium‐6 aluminum‐4 vanadium) disks (4.0 × 6.6 mm) and 20 zirconia (Lava Plus) disks were manufactured using computer‐aided design and computer‐aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology. Twenty heat‐pressed lithium disilicate glass‐ceramic (IPS e.max Press LT) disks were fabricated and used as controls. Bonding protocol for each specimen surface was performed according to manufacturer's instructions. Specimens (n = 10) of zirconia/titanium alloy (ZR) and lithium disilicate/titanium alloy (LD) were bonded using adhesive resin cement (RelyX Ultimate) and then subjected to a heat treatment (HT, 320°C, 2 minutes) to disassemble the bonding complex, cleaned with aluminum oxide airborne‐particle abrasion, and rebonded following the initial protocol, group ZRHT and group LDHT, respectively. After 5000 cycles of thermal cycling, a shear bond test was conducted. A universal testing machine was used at a 5 mm/min crosshead speed. Failed specimens were examined with stereomicroscopy at 10× magnification to identify the mode of failure. One‐way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests were applied for statistical analysis of the shear bond strength data, with statistical significance at α = 0.05. Results The mean ± SD bond strength values ranged from 28.3 ± 7.2 to 45.9 ± 9.7 MPa. Statistically significant lower shear bond strength values were obtained from the LD group (p = 0.002, F = 5.89), while no statistically significant differences in bond strength were observed between the ZR and ZRHT groups (p > 0.05). Failure mode was predominantly mixed‐type failure pattern for all specimens. Conclusions Heat and abrasion surface treatment increased the bond strength of lithium disilicate glass‐ceramics cemented to titanium alloy, but no effect was observed on zirconia/titanium alloy bonding.

No abstract

This article describes a chairside technique to correct inappropriate occlusal vertical dimension as well as the inaccurate anterior-posterior tooth set-up of a maxillary immediate complete denture. When fabricating an immediate denture, the inability of a wax-denture trial and the potential for unpredictable complications during surgery, compromised esthetics and function of an immediate complete denture may pose a clinical problem, which needs instant correction. The technique described can provide an alternative method to correct and deliver a definitive immediate complete denture on the day of surgery.

Over the past decade, emerging evidence indicates a strong relationship between prosthetic design and peri‐implant tissue health. The objective of this narrative review was to evaluate the evidence for the corresponding implant prosthodontic design factors on the risk to peri‐implant tissue health. One of the most important factors to achieve an acceptable implant restorative design is the ideal implant position. Malpositioned implants often result in a restorative emergence profile at the implant‐abutment junction that can restrict the access for patients to perform adequate oral hygiene. Inadequate cleansability and poor oral hygiene has been reported as a precipitating factors to induce the peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis and are influenced by restorative contours. The implant–abutment connection, restorative material selection and restoration design are also reported in the literature as having the potential to influence peri‐implant sort tissue health.