Aims and Objective:To find out and compare peri implant strain developed in four different types of implant supported prostheses i.e., cement retained splinted, cement retained non splinted, screw retained splinted, screw retained non splinted.Methodology:Four implant analogues were placed in a polyurethane mandibular model at the position of left and right first and second molar. Abutments were fixed to the implant at a torque of 25Ncm. Two such models were made. Four different prostheses were placed on abutment of each model i.e screw retained splinted, screw retained nonsplinted, cement retained splinted, cement retained non splinted. Four strain gauges were attached on the model, two on the buccal and two on the lingual aspect of each implant. Static load of 400N was applied on the prosthesis using universal testing machine. Load application was done ten times for each model and peri implant strain was measured.Results:The mean peri implant strain (±SD) generated was found to be highest in non-splinted screw retained (1397.70 ± 44.47 microstrains and 1265.90 ± 42.76 microstrains) and least in splinted cement retained (630.70 ± 31.98 microstrains and 519.60 ± 32.48 microstrains) in both 1st and 2nd molars respectively.Conclusions:Splinted crowns produce less peri implant strain when compared to non splinted crowns. Cement retained prosthesis produce less peri implant strain when compared to screw retained prosthesis. Least strain was observed in cement retained splinted crowns.

Polished dentures obtained from the laboratory require adjustment during insertion. A smooth surface on acrylic resin can be obtained using a chairside protocol for polishing using silicone polishing agents and polishing media. The aim of this paper is to study the effect of three different polishing agents-pumice, universal polishing paste and Brite-O on the surface finish and hardness of two types of denture base acrylic resins-auto polymerizing and heat-activated acrylic resin materials.

Aim:The aim of this study is to evaluate the strain developed in simulated mandibular model before and after the joining of an implant-supported screw-retained prosthesis by different joining techniques, namely, arc welding, laser welding, and soldering.Materials and Methods:A specimen simulating a mandibular edentulous ridge was fabricated in heat-cured acrylic resin. 4-mm holes were drilled in the following tooth positions; 36, 33, 43, 46. Implant analogs were placed in the holes. University of California, Los Angeles, abutment was attached to the implant fixture. Eight strain gauges were attached to the acrylic resin model. Six similar models were made. Implant-supported screw-retained fixed prosthesis was fabricated in nickel-chromium alloy. A load of 400 N was applied on the prosthesis using universal testing machine. Resultant strain was measured in each strain gauge. All the prostheses were sectioned at the area between 36 and 33, 33 and 43, and 43 and 46 using 35 micrometer carborundum disc, and strain was measured in each strain gauge after applying a load of 400 N on the prosthesis. Specimens were joined by arc welding, soldering, and laser welding. After joining, a load of 400 N was applied on each prosthesis and the resultant strain was measured in each strain gauge.Results:Highest mean strain values were recorded before sectioning of the prostheses (889.9 microstrains). Lowest mean strain values were recorded after sectioning the prosthesis and before reuniting it (225.0 microstrains).Conclusions:Sectioning and reuniting the long-span implant prosthesis was found to be a significant factor in influencing the peri-implant strain.

No abstract

Maxillary central incisors have the least incidence of congenital absence. When it does happen, the patient may present with over retained deciduous centrals or the contralateral central may have drifted into the available space presenting as generalised anterior spacing with loss of midline. In such cases a multi-disciplinary approach may be required with orthodontic treatment to re-organise the space available in order to rehabilitate the patient with a fixed prosthesis. This case report presents the treatment of a patient with congenitally missing maxillary left central incisor using dental implant with angulated abutment after orthodontic correction and stabilization of the remaining maxillary anteriors.