PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “DENTAL RESTORATION, TEMPORARY”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 505 records · Page 28Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

A short-term clinical evaluation of immediately restored maxillary TiOblast single-tooth implants.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term clinical outcome of single-tooth implants placed in the maxilla and immediately restored using cementless friction-fit temporary crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients consecutively referred to a private specialist practice for the replacement of failing or missing maxillary teeth were treated by means of immediate temporization of their single-tooth implants. Where teeth were still present, implants were placed immediately following extraction. Provisional crowns were fabricated on a special friction-fit coping by means of autopolymerizing acrylic resin. Definitive crowns were placed a mean of 4.5 months after surgery. Implant survival was recorded along with the level of the marginal bone relative to a fixed reference point 1 year after placement. Any adverse soft tissue changes were also noted. RESULTS: A total of 28 Astra Tech ST dental implants were placed. The overall survival rate at the end of the study was 96.4% for implants which were in function for periods ranging from 15.7 to 27 months. One patient, a smoker, lost 1 implant within 1 month of surgery. Mean marginal bone loss was 0.40 mm (range 0 to 1.53 mm) 1 year after placement of the implants. Many implants (37.5%) had no observed bone loss. No implants or crowns have been lost during the functional loading period. One implant was associated with an unfavorable recession of soft tissues; however, most maintained an esthetic gingival architecture. Eleven of 28 provisional restorations needed treatment; 6 required replacement during the temporization period, and 5 required cementation because of looseness. The ease of removal of the crowns allowed regular access for irrigation with chlorhexidine and thus maintenance of soft tissue health. DISCUSSION: The need to provide provisional restorations for single-tooth gaps often presents challenges. An immediate temporary partial denture or adhesive prosthesis may be unacceptable or impractical. The current study describes a simple method for the immediate temporization of single-tooth implants. The results did not indicate any negative influence on osseointegration or short-term survival once the implants were functionally loaded. CONCLUSION: Immediate temporization of maxillary single-tooth implants can be both safe and predictable, and it appears that the procedure can yield favorable soft tissue esthetics.

Acrylic Resins↗
PubMed1991

[New method for preparation of fiber reinforced temporary crowns and bridges].

In many situations there is an indication for the creation of a long term, functional, chairside temporary bridge or crown. Utilizing a cold-light dual-cure composite material, Dual cement, reinforced with Polyethylene fibers, an excellent, strong bridge or crown will result. The technique is as follows: replace missing tooth/teeth by hand shaping Helioprogress composite restorative to a pontic-form. It will stay in place firmly enough while the Bluephase "mold" impression is taken. Then prepare teeth as they will be needed (no undercuts). By closing their mouth patients coat their teeth with saliva which will act as a separator. Now three fiber bundles in proper length will be used to reinforce the dual cured composite. Wet the fibers with Heliobond to saturate the bundles and wet each filament in the bundles. Examine the internal portions of the Eos Bluephase impression and alter by cutting if necessary to create an acceptable negative tooth shape. Cut a relief hole in the deepest corner of each of the teeth to be duplicated, with a No 4 round bur which will allow the trapped air to escape as the filled mold is repositioned over the teeth to form the temporary restoration. The carefully mixed Dual cement is now pressed in a small amount into each of the preparations involved.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Carbon↗
PubMed2001

Provisional implants: surgical and prosthetic aspects.

Although numerous technological advances have improved the ability of implant practitioners to successfully reconstruct dental implants, providing patients with teeth during the immediate postsurgical period has remained problematic. One solution has been the development of temporary implants. Such provisional implants eliminate the need for a tissue-borne prosthesis that may interfere with the healing of the submerged conventional implants and/or grafting material. This article describes the methodology for placing immediate provisional implants. Three alternative approaches to fabrication of the temporary prosthesis are discussed, and the results of 12 cases are reviewed.

Adult↗
PubMed1976

Pulp reaction to a temporary zinc oxide/eugenol cement.

The pulpal irritation, such as inflammatory reaction and aspiration of pulpal cells, demonstrated after insertion of the zinc oxide/eugenol cement (Nobetec) seems to warrant the following recommendations: (1) A temporary restoration with a zinc oxide/eugenol base should not be inserted in deep cavities without a protective liner or a calcium hydroxide base covering the exposed dentinal tubules. (2) Before the temporary cementing of inlays and crowns with a zinc oxide/eugenol cement, not only should the dentin be properly cleaned and debris removed, but the prepared surfaces should be covered with a calcium hydroxide liner.

Dental Cavity Lining↗
PubMed2005

Histomorphometric evaluation of new bone formation in diabetic rats submitted to insertion of temporary implants.

This study aimed to quantify new bone formation in the femurs of diabetic Wistar rats. Over an eight-week period, MTI-MP implants were evaluated in control rats and in diabetic rats. At several points during this period, various markers for bone deposit were introduced. The material was observed under fluorescent light microscopy. New bone formation in periosteal and cortical regions linked to the implant did not vary significantly between the groups. However, there were significant differences in total new bone formation in the medullar canal and in bone/implant contact area in the medullar portion. Bone deposits attached to the surface of the temporary implants demonstrated that they are biocompatible and capable of osseointegration.

Animals↗
PubMed2006

Influence of eugenol-containing temporary cement on bonding of self-etching adhesives to dentin.

PURPOSE: To investigate the influence of eugenol-containing temporary cement on bonding of resin composite to dentin mediated by self-etching adhesives. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Flat dentin surfaces were produced by grinding of extracted human molars. The dentin surfaces were either used directly or after a one-week exposure to a zinc oxide-eugenol cement (IRM). A resin composite (Herculite XRV) was bonded to the dentin surfaces following treatment with 1 of 6 self-etching adhesives (AdheSE, Adper Prompt L-Pop, Clearfil SE Bond, iBond, OptiBond Solo Plus - Self-Etch Adhesive System, and Xeno III). An adhesive system containing 0.5 M EDTA as dentin conditioner (Gluma Classic) was included as negative control, and an etch-and-rinse adhesive system (OptiBond FL) was included as positive control. After storage in water at 37 degrees C for 1 week, the bonded specimens were fractured in shear (n = 8 in each group). RESULTS: Previous contact of dentin with zinc oxide-eugenol cement significantly decreased the bond strength mediated by the negative control and did not affect the bond strength mediated by the positive control. For the self-etching adhesives, no effect was found of previous contact with zinc oxide-eugenol cement. With and without previous contact with zinc oxide-eugenol cement, the etch-and-rinse adhesive system yielded a significantly higher bond strength than all other adhesive systems. CONCLUSION: Previous contact with zinc oxide-eugenol cement did not decrease the bond strength of resin composite to dentin mediated by self-etching adhesives. This finding suggests that eugenol-containing temporary cements may be safe to use in combination with self-etching adhesives.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMed1995

Some physical and biological properties of glass ionomer cement.

It has become apparent through both clinical use and laboratory experiments that the glass ionomer cements have several highly desirable properties. They show a continuing fluoride release and the ability to take up further fluoride under favourable conditions. The presence of fluoride also helps to inhibit plaque formation. The adhesion between tooth structure and cement also results in almost complete prevention of the bacterial micro-leakage. Also, the cement itself is so highly bio-compatible that it is now being used as a bone substitute and it has become apparent that there is no need to place a sub-lining under a glass ionomer restoration. Recent research is leading to the development of self curing cements with enhanced physical properties so that, in the presence of the above advantages, their use in clinical dentistry is rapidly expanding. Glass ionomer cements are of great value for any restoration which is not under undue occlusal stress and they work well also as a long term temporary restoration in the presence of a high caries rate, where zinc oxide and eugenol used to be the material of choice.

Animals↗
PubMed1994

Characterization of enamel and dentin surfaces after removal of temporary cement--effect of temporary cement on tensile bond strength of resin luting cement.

This study was performed to investigate the effect of temporary sealing with cement on the tensile bond strength of resin luting cement to tooth substrate. Five temporary cements and five resin luting cements were used. Six hundred bovine incisor teeth were randomly divided between each group. Effect of temporary sealing on the tensile bond strength of resin luting cement varied in accordance with the temporary cement used. Temporary sealing with both the eugenol-containing and the eugenol-free temporary cements decreased the tensile bond strength of resin luting cement. The tensile bond strength with one of the resin luting cements was most stable on both enamel and dentin pretreated with all temporary cements tested.

Animals↗
PubMed1999

Microleakage between endodontic temporary restorative materials placed at different times.

Occlusal endodontic access preparations are occasionally made in teeth without removing the original restoration. However, microleakage between restorative materials that are placed at different times has not been extensively studied. Therefore, our objective was to compare microleakage at three areas: between an access opening restorative material and the cavity wall; between an additional material placed later to patch a secondary opening in the first restorative material and the original restorative material itself; and between the secondarily placed material and the cavity wall. Standard endodontic access preparations were made in 120 noncarious, nonrestored crowns of extracted human molars. These teeth were divided into six experimental groups. Another four molars were controls. The endodontic access cavities were restored with either IRM or amalgam as the primary restorative material. After 14 days, half of the primary restorations was removed, and this defect was filled with a secondary restorative material: IRM, Caviton, or a double seal of Caviton and IRM. Microleakage was measured linearly as the extent of basic fuchsin dye penetration under a stereomicroscope after thermal cycling (5 degrees and 55 degrees C for 100 cycles) and tooth sectioning. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used for statistical analysis. Results indicated significantly less microleakage between primary and secondary restorative materials placed at different times than microleakage between primary temporary restorative materials and the access cavity wall, regardless of the type of primary restorative material used (IRM or amalgam).

Calcium Sulfate↗
PubMed2005

A temporary filling material may cause cusp deflection, infractions and fractures in endodontically treated teeth.

AIM: To test the hypothesis that Coltosol F might cause infractions and cusp fracture in root-filled teeth because of material expansion. METHODOLOGY: Thirty-two extracted human molar teeth were root filled and prepared with mesial-occlusal-distal (MOD) cavities with or without undercuts. The specimens were filled proximally with glass-ionomer cement and then occlusally with either Coltosol F or zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE). The tooth specimens were kept in water at 37 degrees C for a period of 20 days, and every second day the intercusp distance (ICD) of each specimen was measured in a travelling microscope, and the number of infraction lines as well as fractures were noted. RESULTS: The number of infraction lines increased in teeth filled with Coltosol F. Between day 8 and 16, seven of 16 teeth filled with Coltosol F showed fracture and exhibited a mean increase in ICD of 316 +/- 156 microm. Teeth filled with ZOE did not show an increase in number of infraction lines or in ICD, and none showed fracture. CONCLUSIONS: The hygroscopic expansion of Coltosol F in a cavity may lead to cusp deflection, infraction development and fracture. Masticatory forces will in vivo aggravate this unfavourable condition. The material is not recommended for temporary filling in root-filled teeth except for a few days.

Calcium Sulfate↗