Primary dental journal最新文献

Data from the literature on temporomandibular disorder (TMD) amplification or exacerbation in whiplash injuries is quite discordant. Substantial controversy exists regarding the incidence, prevalence, proposed mechanism of injury, clinical characteristics, and prognosis of TMDs due to whiplash.This article describes this controversy and presents findings from contemporary literature.

During the 1990s, three Directives were enacted that aimed to harmonise the regulation of medical devices within the European Union (EU). Custom-made devices (CMDs) were subject to Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices (Medical Device Directive [MDD]), which was given effect in the UK by the Medical Devices Regulations 2002 (UK MDR 2002). Regulation (EU) 2017/745 (Medical Device Regulation [EU MDR]) replaced the MDD and was transposed into the Medical Devices (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 in the UK. The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020 and entered an 11-month implementation period (IP), during which any new EU legislation that was enacted also took effect in the UK. The EU MDR was scheduled to be fully implemented on 26 May 2020 (during the IP) but this was deferred for one year, until 26 May 2021 (after the IP had concluded), as a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Consequently, the EU MDR was removed from the UK statute book by a further amendment to the UK MDR 2002, the Medical Devices (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020. Since 1 January 2021, CMDs manufactured in Great Britain can conform to either the UK MDR 2002 (as amended) or the EU MDR (until 30 June 2023) while devices manufactured in Northern Ireland are subject to the EU MDR alone. CMDs must be supplied with a statement, a label and, depending on the risk class, instructions for use; this paper answers ten questions regarding this documentation following these legislative changes.

This report presents a clinical case that follows a comprehensive digital workflow to increase occlusal vertical dimension of a patient presenting with occlusal wear. A 56-year-old patient with aesthetic and functional problems presented to the authors' clinic. An intraoral scanner was used to obtain digital models of the patient's existing maxillary and mandibular arches. Advanced sculpting software and digital tooth libraries were used to design the patient's ideal smile. A three-dimensional (3D) printer was used to fabricate temporary restorations and resin casts. Full-mouth restoration was successfully completed with zirconia crowns using an advanced digital workflow.

This case report describes a post-retained crown placed on an anterior tooth that survived 78 years, with restoration repairs at 40 years and 58 years following placement. The history of the patient's other dental restorations and care showed a similar longevity.

Purpose: A range of materials for single-tooth computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) restorations have been introduced that may affect CAM accuracy. This study aimed to review articles evaluating marginal and internal fit of lithium disilicate (LD) and zirconia (Z) crowns fabricated by CAD-CAM systems using intraoral optical scanners (IOS).

Materials and methods: Under the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA), a systematic review was performed along with an electronic article search in the Medline/Pubmed database. The articles were limited to those in the English language that were published within the past ten years.

Results: The initial search resulted in 50 articles and of those, a total of 18 articles were selected for full-text review following abstract evaluation. Eight articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded and the remaining ten articles, which provided internal and marginal gap values, were used in this review. For LD crowns, marginal gap values ranged between 45µm and 190.2µm. For Z crowns, the values varied between 39µm and 126.4µm. For LD crowns, the internal gap values were between 57.8µm and 475.4µm, and for Z crowns, the values were between 79µm and 205.8µm.

Conclusion: The outcome of this review suggests that clinically acceptable marginal and internal fit can be attained with LD and Z all-ceramic CAD-CAM crowns using digital impressions. Additionally, it has been found that LD and Z ceramics provide similar marginal gap values, but LD material provides better internal fit than Z.

This article will provide a summary of causes of incomplete root end closure and the implications of this on endodontic treatment. The limitations and benefits of traditional and more contemporary materials including the use of bioceramic cements are considered. The apical barrier technique is described in detail for teeth with immature apices utilising a variety of bioceramic cements and regenerative endodontic procedures with an overview of appropriate instruments to successfully complete the procedure.