Loss of osseointegration of implant fixtures and mechanical failure of superstructures have been attributed to failure to achieve a passive fit between the superstructure and the transmucosal abutment (TMA). The fit of five mandibular superstructures, fabricated on Nobel Biocare implants, was investigated in vivo, using a polyvinyl siloxane impression material to record the discrepancies. Following sectioning of the impressions, the vertical and horizontal discrepancies were analysed at four locations using a travelling microscope. The discrepancies obtained were measured both when the gold cylinder screws were maximally tightened by hand and when tightened with a torque driver to the recommended value of 10 Ncm. The vertical discrepancies for the hand tightened abutments ranged from 0 micron to 63 microns with a mean of 14 microns. In the mechanically tightened group, the vertical discrepancies ranged from 0 micron to 130 microns with a mean of 21 microns. The horizontal discrepancies for the mechanically tightened abutments ranged from 0 micron to 140 microns with a mean of 31 microns, compared with a mean of 46 microns and range of 0 micron to 113 microns, for the hand-tightened abutments. A close fit was seldom achieved. It is concluded that considerable discrepancies existed around superstructures that had been judged to have a clinically acceptable fit. These were reduced in the vertical direction by hand tightening of the gold screws.
2 periodontal dressings, Coe-pak and RD8 (a product under development), were assessed following periodontal surgery, using a double-blind study of randomised split-mouth design, with each patient acting as their own control. Matched sites were selected for periodontal flap surgery under local analgesia. Sites were randomly allocated to each group. The dressings were applied by a single operator and both patients and clinical assessors were blind as to the dressing employed. The dressings were assessed as to their handling properties, in addition to a 7-day post-operative assessment of the surgical sites and a subjective patient report. Maximum pain levels were relatively low (4 in a scale 0-10); subjects reported more pain and analgesics required with RD8 than with Coe-pak. This was reflected in the results of the patient assessment which indicated that 50% preferred Coe-pak, compared to 25% who preferred the RD8 dressing. The results showed RD8 to be an acceptable periodontal dressing when compared to Coe-pak. There were no statistically significant differences between treated sites in both groups with regard to post-operative plaque scores, bleeding scores or tissue healing.
There are many reasons why patients are referred to consultants in restorative dentistry and these range from general practitioners requiring treatment planning advice, to the desire for the consultant to undertake the treatment. The consultation process should be seen as an opportunity to educate the patient about the nature of their dental problem, to make them aware of the various treatment alternatives as well as to inform them of their role in the prevention of further disease. The nature of the hospital-based consultation means that the general dental practitioner is to a large extent a passive onlooker. The educational value for the practitioner will be dependent upon the nature of the written report (or other forms of communication) sent to the general dental practitioner following the consultation. In some cases this may be very limited, so when the practitioner is faced with a similar case, because they have not been actively involved with the previous examination and consultation, they will have no alternative but to also refer the new case for treatment planning advice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.