Apical limit of root canal filling and its relationship with success on endodontic treatment of a mandibular molar: 11-year follow-up

Objective. This article discusses the relationship between apical limit of root canal filling and success on endodontic treatment of a mandibular molar. Study design. A mandibular right first molar with vital pulp was endodontically treated, and 3 years later periapical lesions on mesial and distal roots were detected. The canals were retreated and obturated to the same levels as in the previous treatment. Results. An 8-year radiographic follow-up showed repair of the periapical lesions on both roots. Conclusions. Results suggest that the apical limit of obturation seems to have no influence in the repair of periapical tissues in mandibular molars. (Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011; 112: e48-e50)

Photoelastic Study of the Support Structures of Distal-Extension Removable Partial Dentures

Purpose: The double system of support, in which the distal-extension removable partial denture adapts, causes inadequate stress around abutment teeth, increasing the possibility of unequal bone resorption. Several ways to reduce or more adequately distribute the stress between abutment teeth and residual ridges have been reported; however, there are no definitive answers to the problem. The purpose of this study was to analyze, by means of photoelasticity, the most favorable stress distribution using three retainers: T bar, rest, proximal plate, I bar (RPI), and circumferential with mesialized rest. Materials and Methods: Three photoelastic models were made simulating a Kennedy Class II inferior arch. Fifteen dentures with long saddles, five of each design, were adjusted to the photoelastic patterns and submitted first to uniformly distributed load, and then to a load localized on the last artificial tooth. The saddles were then shortened and the tests repeated. The quantitative and qualitative analyses of stress intensity were done manually and by photography, respectively. For intragroup analyses the Wilcoxon test for paired samples was used, while for intergroup analyses Friedman and Wilcoxon tests were used to better identify the differences (p < 0.05). Results: The RPI retainer, followed by the T bar, demonstrated the best distribution of load between teeth and residual ridge. The circumferential retainer caused greater concentration of stress between dental apexes. Stress distribution was influenced by the type of retainer, the length of the saddle, and the manner of load application. Conclusions: The long saddles and the uniformly distributed loads demonstrated better distribution of stress on support structures.

The relationship between interimplant distances and vascularization of the interimplant bone

Background Long-term success of the implant restorations is based upon the biology and vasculature of the bone surrounding the implants, especially for the bone between two implants. Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate how loaded implants placed 2 or 3 mm apart influence bone vessel organization. Material and methods Six mongrel dogs were used for the study. The four mandibular premolars were extracted and 3 months later, four 4.5 x 10 mm implants were placed on each side of the mandible. The implants were placed so that two adjacent implants were 2 mm (group 1) or 3 mm (group 2) distant from each other. After 12 weeks, the implants were loaded with provisional prostheses, then metallic crowns were placed 4 weeks later. Both temporary and metallic restorations were made so that the distance between the contact point and the bone crest was 5 mm. The animals were sacrificed after 8 weeks. The hemi-mandibles were removed and prepared for analysis. The interimplant bone vasculature of the two groups was studied using scanning electron microscopic images fractal analysis. The fractal dimension (D(f)) was calculated using the box-counting method. Results The values of the D(f) for the blood vessels were significantly higher (P <.05) in the specimens of the group 2 (1.969 +/- 0.169) than the group 1 (1.556 +/- 0.246). Conclusion The presence of more blood vessels in the group 2 is another indication that 3 mm is a preferable distance for contiguous implants than the 2 mm distance. To cite this article:Traini T, Novaes AB, Piattelli A, Papalexiou V, Muglia VA. The relationship between interimplant distances and vascularization of the interimplant bone.Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 21, 2010; 822-829.doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01926.x.

Testing the retention of attachments for implant overdentures - validation of an original force measurement system

P>The aim of this study was to validate an original portable device to measure attachment retention of implant overdentures both in the lab and in clinical settings. The device was built with a digital force measurement gauge (Imada) secured to a vertical wheel stand associated with a customized support to hold and position the denture in adjustable angulations. Sixteen matrix and patrix cylindrical stud attachments (Locator (R)) were randomly assigned as in vitro test specimens. Attachment abutments were secured in an implant analogue hung to the digital force gauge or to the load cell of a traction machine used as the gold standard (Instron Universal Testing Machine). Matrices were secured in a denture duplicate attached to the customized support, permitting reproducibility of their position on both pulling devices. Attachment retention in the axial direction was evaluated by measuring maximum dislodging force or peak load during five consecutive linear dislodgments of each attachment on both devices. After a wear simulation, retention was measured again at several time periods. The peak load measurements with the customized Imada device were similar to those obtained with the gold standard Instron machine. These findings suggest that the proposed portable device can provide accurate information on the retentive properties of attachment systems for removable dental prostheses.

An in vitro study of non-axial forces upon the retention of an O-ring attachment

Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the retention force of an O-ring attachment system in different inclinations to the ideal path of insertion, using devices to compensate angulations. Material and methods Two implants were inserted into an aluminum base, and ball attachments were screwed to implants. Cylinders with O-rings were placed on ball attachments and connected to the test device using positioners to compensate implant angulations (0 degrees, 7 degrees, and 14 degrees). Plexiglass bases were used to simulate implant angulations. The base and the test device were positioned in a testing apparatus, which simulated insertion/removal of an overdenture. A total of 2900 cycles, simulating 2 years of overdenture use, were performed and 36 O-rings were tested. The force required for each cycle was recorded with computer software. Longitudinal sections of ball attachment-positioner-cylinder with O-rings of each angulation were obtained to analyze the relationship among them, and O-ring sections tested in each angulation were compared with an unused counterpart. A mixed linear model was used to analyze the data, and the comparison was performed by orthogonal contrasts (alpha=0.05). Results At 0 degrees, the retention force decreased significantly over time, and the retention force was significantly different in all comparisons, except from 12 to 18 months. When the implants were positioned at 7 degrees, the retention force was statistically different at 0 and 24 months. At 14 degrees, significant differences were found from 6 and 12 to 24 months. Conclusions Within the limitations of this study, it was concluded that O-rings for implant/attachments perpendicular to the occlusal plane were adequately retentive over the first year and that the retentive capacity of O-ring was affected by implant inclinations despite the proposed positioners. To cite this article:Rodrigues RCS, Faria ACL, Macedo AP, Sartori IAM, de Mattos MGC, Ribeiro RF. An in vitro study of non-axial forces upon the retention of an O-ring attachment.Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 20, 2009; 1314-1319.doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01742.x.