Zirconia implants are a promising alternative to titanium with a superior soft-tissue response, biocompatibility, and aesthetics with comparable osseointegration. However, further long-term longitudinal and comparative clinical trials are required to validate zirconia as a viable alternative to the titanium implant.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose. For a precise fit of multiple implant framework, having an accurate definitive cast is imperative. The present study evaluated dimensional accuracy of master casts obtained using different impression trays and materials with open tray impression technique. Materials and Methods. A machined aluminum reference model with four parallel implant analogues was fabricated. Forty implant level impressions were made. Eight groups (n = 5) were tested using impression materials (polyether and vinylsiloxanether) and four types of impression trays, two being custom (self-cure acrylic and light cure acrylic) and two being stock (plastic and metal). The interimplant distances were measured on master casts using a coordinate measuring machine. The collected data was compared with a standard reference model and was statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA. Results. Statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) was found between the two impression materials. However, the difference seen was small (36 μm) irrespective of the tray type used. No significant difference (p > 0.05) was observed between varied stock and custom trays. Conclusions. The polyether impression material proved to be more accurate than vinylsiloxanether impression material. The rigid nonperforated stock trays, both plastic and metal, could be an alternative for custom trays for multi-implant impressions when used with medium viscosity impression materials.

Auricular defects comprise a large proportion of maxillofacial deformities. Most patients with acquired deformities have psychosocial ineptness and seek cosmetic rehabilitation. Although minor defects can be corrected surgically, extensive deformities are difficult to reconstruct with plastic surgery. Contrary to that, prosthetic restoration can provide excellent esthetic results. The conventional methods of maxillofacial prosthesis fabrication are time consuming and the outcome depends on the technician's skill. The advent of CAD/CAM technology in the field of dentistry has brought enormous improvement in the quality of health care provided. In the past decade, several methods have been described employing CAD/CAM techniques for the cosmetic rehabilitation of auricular defects. This clinical report details the integration of multiple digital technologies of CT scanning, computer aided design, and rapid prototyping to construct an ear prosthesis with limited number of appointments.

No abstract

Background Food impaction is a common risk factor for the initiation of peri‐implant inflammation and failure of the osseointegrated implant. Although clinicians do acknowledge the presence of food impaction around implants and implant‐retained prosthesis, no classification system has yet classified the food impaction around the implant and implant‐retained prosthesis. Purpose The present paper aims to identify and classify the plausible etiology of food impaction around implants and implant‐related prosthesis. Materials and Methods The following search terms were utilized for data search: “Food Impaction” AND “Implants” AND “Food Impaction” AND “Perimplantitis” AND “Food Impaction” AND “Classification.” Articles that were written in the English language in PubMed and Cochrane Library database from 1930 till September 2018 were scrutinized. A total of 24 articles were scrutinized, out of which only 15 articles were selected. Results Food impaction around implants is broadly classified into five categories based on the number of implants, nature of implants prosthesis involved for replacement and relation of the implant prosthesis to the adjacent tooth, restoration, or prosthesis. Conclusion This is the first classification designed to classify food impaction around dental implants and implant‐retained prosthesis. The classification can be used by clinicians for optimal diagnosis, interpretation, and treatment plan for patients.