In the current orthodontic and prosthodontics practice, study models made of plaster are being used to provide a three-dimensional view of the patient’s occlusion and allow the clinician to analyze, diagnose, or monitor anomalies. With the introduction of intraoral and extra oral digital impressions, it is now possible to obtain digital study models of the patients’ dental arches. Digital models can be obtained in a physical hardcopy via 3D printing or rapid prototyping. Although, professional 3D printers require a high initial set-up cost, low cost 3D printers can provide similar quality products. The aim of this study is to investigate the accuracy of physical dental models reconstructed from digital data by two rapid prototyping techniques. For this purpose twenty mandibular and maxillary conventional plaster models from randomly chosen subjects were selected and served as the gold standard. The casts were digitized using a 3D scanner and .stl surface models were acquired; the virtual model was adjusted for reconstruction using dedicated software, thus obtaining the CAD model of the casts. The CAD models were reconstructed using a 3D fused deposition modeling (FDM) printer, a RepRap FDM printer and an inverted stereolithography printer. The reconstructed models were digitized using a laboratory 3D scanner and the resulting Mesh datasets were compared with the CAD model using inspection software. The mean systematic differences for the 3D comparison of the reconstructed models were 0.207 mm for the stereolithography models, 0.156 mm for the FDM models, and 0.128 mm for the RepRap models. Although a technology proved the ability to manufacture a dental model with accentuated morphology, the results demonstrate that replicas of plaster casts are influenced by problems linked to the size of the detail to be reproduced, which is often similar to or finer than the fabrication layer.

The unprecedented climate of the COVID-19 pandemic has some restrictions on oral care operational services, which heavily impacted the delivery of aerosol generating procedures (AGPs). This led the health authorities to set up guidelines and policies that should be followed to minimize the virus spread and ensure safe and effective dental care delivery. This systemic review aimed to evaluate the current guidelines and strategies in providing safe dental services and ensuring efficacy of the current universal personal preventive and protective measures, as well the impact that this outbreak might have on practicing the dental profession in full scope. The review focus questions were as follows: are the current guidelines and measures in literature mitigated enough to ensure safe and effective oral care delivery to patients during the COVID-19 pandemic? Is it possible to highlight the essential and fundamental cross-infection control measures and policies? Twenty articles were chosen out of 180,248 after the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied in the period between January 1st and August 1st 2020. Our results highlighted effective safety measures that can be implanted in protecting healthcare professionals and patients and ensuring optimal dental care delivery in a safe and healthy environment, taking into consideration the risk assessment and management of AGPs. In conclusion, informative updated standardized policies and protocols are required when more knowledge on the virus behavior keeps evolving. Moreover, there is a need for evidence-based protective measures to be modified on a regular basis to be followed, until a safe vaccine is produced.

This study examined and compared surface of human dentine after acidic etching with hydrogen peroxide, phosphoric acid liquid and gel. Surface demineralization of dentin is necessary for a strong bond of adhesive at dental surface. Split human teeth were used. After application of mentioned substances at dentin level measures of the contact angle and surface morphology were employed. Surface morphology was analyzed with the help of scanning electron microscopy and atomic force microscopy. Liquid phosphoric acid yielded highest demineralization showing better hydrophobicity than the rest, thus having more contact surface. Surface roughness are less evident and formed surface micropores of 4 �m remained open after wash and air dry providing better adhesive canalicular penetration and subsequent bond.

The replacement of classical fillings, especially in the posterior area with different types of inlays has become a common solution used in order to improve all parameters which insure a long lasting treatment. Vrious ceramic materials and systems are available, but so far an ideal ceramic material suited for all clinical situations, has not been found. The range of ceramic materials as: lithium disilicate, aluminum oxide, zirconium oxide and hybrid ceramics enhance the possibilities of using ceramic inalys in various clinical situations. Marginal adaptation is one of the most important conditions for long-term success for any type of material. The marginal discrepancy of fixed restorations is one of the main factors which lead to failure of the prosthetic treatment.The purpose of the present study is to compare a 2D and 3D method for evaluating the marginal fit for pressed lithium dislicate inlays (Emax). The two used methods were: SEM- electronic microscopy and micro CT.

The main goal of the present study is to compare the marginal fit of two different kind of pressed materials: a partially crystalline thermoplastic resin reinforced with ceramic particles (BioHPP) and lithium disilicate (EMax), through the use of the microCT technique. After extraction of four caries-free mandibular first molars, first class inlay cavities were prepared. For each tooth two inlays were manufactured- one by using BioHPP thermoplastic resin (n=4) and one by using Emax Press lithium disilicate (n=4). The marginal gap was analyzed circumferentially at the occlusal margin using a Bruker micro CT, by measuring the distance at the occlusal limit of the cavities, between the restoration and the tooth in several points for every surface of each tooth before cementing. Data were analyzed statistically using the Mann-Whitney U test and the Pearson�s correlation coefficient (a=0.05). A significant statistical difference was found between the marginal gap size obtained for BioHPP and Emax inlays (p[0.001). For the Emax inlays the marginal gap had an average of 72mm, while for BioHPP the average was 94 �m. Both types of used materials offer a good marginal adaptation. By summing up the gathered data we can conclude that the pressed ceramics shows a better marginal fit than the pressed resin, probably because of the different processing methods: sintering versus polymerizing with different shrinkage values.