Dimensional Accuracy of Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Assisted Manufactured Orbital Prostheses

Purpose: The aim of this research was to assess the dimensional accuracy of orbital prostheses based on reversed images generated by computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD/CAM) using computed tomography (CT) scans. Materials and Methods: CT scans of the faces of 15 adults, men and women older than 25 years of age not bearing any congenital or acquired craniofacial defects, were processed using CAD software to produce 30 reversed three-dimensional models of the orbital region. These models were then processed using the CAM system by means of selective laser sintering to generate surface prototypes of the volunteers` orbital regions. Two moulage impressions of the faces of each volunteer were taken to manufacture 15 pairs of casts. Orbital defects were created on the right or left side of each cast. The surface prototypes were adapted to the casts and then flasked to fabricate silicone prostheses. The establishment of anthropometric landmarks on the orbital region and facial midline allowed for the data collection of 31 linear measurements, used to assess the dimensional accuracy of the orbital prostheses and their location on the face. Results: The comparative analyses of the linear measurements taken from the orbital prostheses and the opposite sides that originated the surface prototypes demonstrated that the orbital prostheses presented similar vertical, transversal, and oblique dimensions, as well as similar depth. There was no transverse or oblique displacement of the prostheses. Conclusion: From a clinical perspective, the small differences observed after analyzing all 31 linear measurements did not indicate facial asymmetry. The dimensional accuracy of the orbital prostheses suggested that the CAD/CAM system assessed herein may be applicable for clinical purposes. Int J Prosthodont 2010;23:271-276.

The Importance of Adhesive Area Delimitation in a Microshear Bond Strength Experimental Design

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the influence of adhesive area delimitation on the microshear bond strength of different adhesives to dentin. Materials and Methods: Eighteen bovine incisors were sectioned and the exposed dentin surfaces were prepared with 600-grit SIC paper. These teeth were randomly divided into three groups, according to the adhesive to be applied: two-step etch-and-rinse Adper Single Bond 2 (3M ESPE), two-step self-etching Clearfil SE Bond (Kuraray), and one-step Clearfil S(3) Bond (Kuraray). On each dentin surface, 4 samples were built up with the composite resin Z100 (3M ESPE); on 2 of these, a suggested area delimitation technique was employed. After 24 h of storage in water at 37 degrees C, samples were subjected to the microshear bond strength test, and the failure modes were evaluated under optical and scanning electron microscopes. The obtained results were statistical analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey`s test. Results: Groups without area delimitation presented significantly higher bond strength results (p < 0.05) and a higher incidence of cohesive failures. In these groups, fractures tended to occur beyond the limits of the actual adhesive area, while the area restriction technique succeeded in avoiding this phenomenon. The three adhesives performed similarly when area delimitation was employed (p > 0.05), but Clearfil S(3) Bond showed significantly higher bond strength results when no area delimitation was taken into account (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The extension of the adhesive area beyond the limits of the composite cylinder may play an important role in the results of microshear bond strength tests, while the suggested area delimitation technique may lead to less questionable outcomes.

Influence of differently oriented dentin surfaces and the regional variation of specimens on adhesive layer thickness and bond strength

Statement of the Problem: Adhesive systems can spread differently onto a substrate and, consequently, influence bonding. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of differently oriented dentin surfaces and the regional variation of specimens on adhesive layer thickness and microtensile bond strength (MTBS). Materials and Methods: Twenty-four molars were sectioned mesiodistally to expose flat buccal and lingual halves. Standardized drop volumes of adhesive systems (Single Bond [SB] and Prime & Bond 2.1 [PB2.1]) were applied to dentin according to the manufacturer`s instructions. Teeth halves were randomly divided into groups: 1A-SB/parallel to gravity; 1B-SB/perpendicular to gravity; 2A-PB2.1/parallel to gravity; and 2B-PB2.1/perpendicular to gravity. The bonded assemblies were stored in 37 degrees C distilled water for 24 hours and then sectioned to obtain dentin sticks (0.8 mm(2)). The adhesive layer thickness was determined in a light microscope (x200), and after 48 hours the specimens were subjected to MTBS test. Data were analyzed by one-way and two-way analysis of variance and Student-Newman-Keuls tests. Results: Mean values (MPa +/- SD) of MTBS were: 39.1 +/- 12.9 (1A); 32.9 +/- 12.4 (1B); 52.9 +/- 15.2 (2A); and 52.3 +/- 16.5 (2B). The adhesive systems` thicknesses (mu m +/- SD) were: 11.2 +/- 2.9 (1A); 18.1 +/- 7.3 (1B); 4.2 +/- 1.8 (2A); and 3.9 +/- 1.3 (2B). No correlation between bond strength and adhesive layer thickness for both SB and PB2.1 (r = -0.224, p = 0.112 and r = 0.099, p = 0.491, respectively) was observed. Conclusions: The differently oriented dentin surfaces and the regional variation of specimens on the adhesive layer thickness are material-dependent. These variables do not influence the adhesive systems` bond strength to dentin. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Adhesive systems have different viscosities and spread differently onto a substrate, influencing the bond strength and also the adhesive layer thickness. Adhesive thickness does not influence dentin bond strength, but it may impair adequate solvent evaporation, polymer conversion, and may also determine water sorption and adhesive degradation over time. In the literature, many studies have shown that the adhesive layer is a permeable membrane and can fail over timebecause ofits continuous plasticizing and degradation when in contact with water. Therefore, avoiding thick adhesive layers may minimize these problems and provide long-term success for adhesive restorations.