China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Radiosurgical Techniques
Published in Jeffrey A Sherman, Oral Radiosurgery, 2020
A 47-year-old female reported with decay under her crown on the lower left mandibular lateral incisor. A root canal was performed and the tooth was then restored with a cast post and core and porcelain fused to gold crown. Radiosurgery was used to create a trough and expose the margins of the tooth.
Influence of the Er,Cr:YSGG laser and radial firing tips on the push-out bond strength of glass fiber posts
Published in J. Belinha, R.M. Natal Jorge, J.C. Reis Campos, Mário A.P. Vaz, João Manuel, R.S. Tavares, Biodental Engineering V, 2019
A.I. Araújo, M. Martins, J.C. Reis Campos, A. Barros, A. Azevedo, T. Oliveira
On the other hand, the amount of remaining hard tissue and restoration technique seems to be preponderant in the occurrence of radicular fractures (Swanson and Madison, 1987). Therefore, if the remaining tooth structure is not sufficient to retain the restorative material, one can preconize the selection and use of a post and core build-up system (Tian et al., 2012).
Fixed prosthodontics—clinical vs pre-clinical practice
Published in R.M. Natal Jorge, J.C. Reis Campos, Mário A.P. Vaz, Sónia M. Santos, João Manuel R.S. Tavares, Biodental Engineering IV, 2017
Carlos Ferreira Almeida, Rui Machado, Orlando F. Lino, César Silva, João Carlos Sampaio-Fernandes
The second year involves practical demonstrations and pre-clinical practice in simulators (phantoms) of multiple teeth and dental preparations (upper arch: two central incisors, one canine, two premolars, one first molar; lower arch: one premolar and one molar), as well as the development of post and core restorations, impressions and cementing techniques (6 ECTS).
Fracture resistance of resin based and lithium disilicate endocrowns. Which is better? – A systematic review of in-vitro studies
Published in Biomaterial Investigations in Dentistry, 2021
Joshna Beji Vijayakumar, Preethi Varadan, Lakshmi Balaji, Mathan Rajan, Rajeswari Kalaiselvam, Sindhu Saeralaathan, Arathi Ganesh
Traditionally, post and core-retained crowns were the post-endodontic restoration of choice for teeth with extensive coronal loss. The post space preparation and the tooth preparation for full coverage crowns in this traditional approach cause further loss of tooth structure in the already mutilated teeth and can eventually lead to catastrophic fractures [1]. However, due to the advancement in the dental materials and adhesive technology, endocrowns are recommended as conservative post endodontic restorations for structurally compromised posterior teeth where there is greater than or equal to half the residual tooth structure present and provided the occlusion is favorable [2] and are also indicated even in endodontically treated teeth with extensive coronal loss with at least 3 mm intra-pulp chamber depth, 2 mm axial wall thickness and short clinical crown height [3].
Core build-up resin composites: an in-vitro comparative study
Published in Biomaterial Investigations in Dentistry, 2020
L. Spinhayer, A.T.B. Bui, J.G. Leprince, C.M.F. Hardy
Various strategies are available regarding the core build-up, the oldest of which being a direct core build-up using amalgam. The latter presents good mechanical properties and clinical performances and is still described by some authors as one of the best options for core build-ups with extensive tissue loss [8,9]. However, this material is progressively disappearing from dental practices for various reasons, including aesthetic, political and environmental considerations, as well as the lack of adhesion to tooth tissues. Another possibility is the custom metallic cast post and core, which is clinically well established and remains another valid option in terms of restoration longevity, but which has been associated with more dramatic failure modes [10]. They also require longer clinical and lab time and involve additional costs. For these reasons along with the progress made over the years in adhesive technology [11], resin composites (RCs) are more and more used by practitioners as core build-up materials [5]. These restorations save time for the practitioner, who can build the core in one go and one appointment and is less expensive for the patient.
Patients’ self-report on post-retained restoration is more valuable than expected! Explorative analysis of an 11-year follow-up
Published in Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, 2019
Manja von Stein-Lausnitz, Daniel R. Reissmann, Matthias J. Roggendorf, Guido Sterzenbach, Michael Naumann
Long-term RCTs on post-endodontic restorations are scarce [10,11]. Diverse studies have been carried out to generate long-term data on post-restored endodontically treated teeth (ETT) by deviating from an RCT design. Fokkinga et al. published a 17-year follow-up study performed by 17 calibrated dentists in a multi-practice setting [12]. After analyzing data of 257 patients with different post-and-core restorations the showed that after 15 years 68% of the teeth were available, and after 17 years this number had reduced to 28%. Another 10-year observational study evaluated post-endodontic restorations with glass-fibre posts by including a total of 149 posts placed in 119 patients [13]. Up to 120 months of follow-up 34 patients were lost. Moreover, Bateli et al. reported results on survival of teeth restored with endodontic zirconia posts from a 10-year retrospective study, showing an approximate 50% drop-out rate [14]. Furthermore, another 19.5-year retrospective study by Raedel et al., focusing on the survival of ETT restored with cast post and cores showed that survival rates of restorations (mean survival time 13.5 years) of a proportionally large cohort of 343 patients were able to be calculated, despite the methodological limitations of the study [15]. Short- and medium-term studies with follow-up periods of 32 months [16], 4 years [17] and 5 years [18] discontinued reporting prior to the 10-year end point. The reasons for this may be very complex; however, one co-factor may have been the drop-out rate, which was relatively high at the 5-year follow-up [18].