Background: Gingivectomy is a procedure often performed in everyday clinical practice using numerous instruments. Aim: To evaluate and compare the gingival cut surface after gingivectomy with 6 different surgical instruments – a surgical scalpel, an Er:YAG laser, a CO2 laser, a ceramic bur, an electrocautery device, and a diode laser. Materials and methods: Gingivectomy using the above listed instruments was performed in 18 patients. The histological samples excised with a surgical scalpel were assigned as a control group and the other five types – as test groups. The following histological parameters were measured: coagulation layer thickness (in μm); presence or absence of a microscopic rupture and presence or absence of hemostasis in-depth. Results: The best instrument of the above listed ones which demonstrated excellent results is the CO2 laser. The Er:YAG laser has a thin coagulation layer and lack of hemostasis in-depth. The diode laser has the widest coagulation layer which is an advantage from a clinical point of view. Electrocautery proved to be as effective as the diode laser, but it should not be used around metal restorations. The ceramic bur has less pronounced hemostasis in-depth. Conclusions: Modern dentistry uses a wide variety of methods that are designed to be applied in everyday practice. Good knowledge of the ways to use them, their advantages and disadvantages is essential to obtaining the optimal result depending on the clinical case.

Photodynamic disinfection is a new method for cleaning dentures of edentulous patients. It is based on the photochemical action of a photoactive dye (photosensitizer), activated by proper light in the presence of oxygen. The mechanism of photosensitization directs the generation of reactive oxygen species that destroy the pathogens. A pilot study of photodynamic disinfection of dentures was carried out. Four different photosensitizers susceptible to red light were used for the investigation. Results showed that photodynamic disinfection is an effective method for inactivation of pathogens on dentures as a part of prevention of cross-contamination in dental office. It also can be used as a part of the therapy of denture stomatitis.

Introduction: The type of the preparation junction is determined by a number of factors that need to be taken in consideration with CAD/CAM Fixed Prosthodontics: the material of which the construction will be made; the type and condition of the retainer teeth, of their periodontium and the occlusion; the design software, the CAM setting and the type of drills; the working protocol; the type of the cement and the method of cementation.Purpose: The aim of this publication is to describe the optimal preparation junctions for all-ceramic crown and bridge restorations made by CAM 5 - S 2 Impression, VHF.Materials and methods: Suitable are chamfer and shoulder preparation junction with rounded inner angle (width 1 - 1, 5 mm). Trimming of 1.5 – 2 mm dental tissues is necessary on the occlusal surface. The homothetic reduction of teeth is optimal.Results and discussion: The width depends on the size and vitality of the tooth. In stained teeth and those built with metal pins the removal of more tissues provides a greater volume needed to disguise the dark color. Vestibular preparation under the level of the gingiva is preferable to ensure optimal aesthetics. Preparation junction is determined also by the CAD/CAM technology - the type of drills and protocol of impression taking (classical or digital). The creation of a working model with TRIOS, 3Shape intraoral scanner is greatly facilitated by preparation junctions made above the gingival margin.Conclusion: Knowledge about the criteria for selection the preparation junctions is essential for fabrication accurate and aesthetic CAD/CAM restorations.