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 1,135 records · Page 63Linked to original sources
PubMed1990

Provisional restoration for a patient with cleft lip and palate: a clinical report.

A method for designing and fitting a provisional restoration for a patient with a cleft lip and palate was described. The provisional prosthesis provides an alternative treatment option that allows the dentist to plan the definitive restoration while providing the patient with a temporary but esthetic and functional restoration.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1981

Removal of partially loosened fixed partial dentures.

The technique described offers maximum safety for the abutment tooth and the probability of salvage of the existing restoration. The options of reusing the restoration or recementing it as a temporary restoration are both attractive.

Dental Abutments↗
PubMed1996

Reattaching salvageable crowns.

The technique of reattachment of broken, but otherwise intact, crowns is one worth exploring. The time constraints placed upon the dentist to evaluate this type of emergency patient can be quite burdensome. The technique offers an alternative solution to this problem. As dental practitioners, our first reaction to this type of emergency situation might include a series of logical steps to restore the tooth. These steps might include a new core build up with pins, then onto a temporary crown. A second alternative might be to initiate root canal therapy and manufacture a temporary post and crown. Still another option may include extraction of the tooth and an impression for an interim partial denture, later to be replaced by implant supported crowns, removable partial denture, or other prosthesis. Adding reattachment of the broken crown back onto the tooth gives just one more alternative to an otherwise lengthy and difficult set of possible solutions. Most of the more conventional types of treatment listed above can be quite time-consuming. Multiple appointments may be needed, and the shock in learning this reality may be overwhelming to the patient. Quite often, a patient that is in need of reattachment of a crown will have many other dental needs. Exhausting a patient's finances, as well as their time limits in restoring just one tooth may not be prudent. It may make more sense to repair, if only temporarily, one tooth and to go on to the next most pressing dental concern. Reattachment of the crown, although not always an easy solution, can be learned, and with practice, the technique can be expanded to include more difficult cases, including fractured bridges,and teeth with broken posts. These methods can be performed in one appointment with a high degree of success. Although it is best to advise the patient of the temporary nature of the treatment, it is quite likely that the repair will hold up almost as well as the original project.

Adult↗
PubMed1990

[Multiple agenesis and prosthetic restoration].

Cases of multiple agenesia present some difficulties in the treatment planing. Three situations may be encountered: limited agenesia, restored by a fixed, bonded or cemented prosthesis, multiple uni- or bimaxillary agenesia without remaining of deciduous teeth, restored by a fixed, bonded or cemented prosthesis or the partial adjacent prosthesis, multiple uni- or bimaxillary agenesia with remaining of deciduous teeth, restored by means of a supra-dental prosthesis. The first two situations have been described in dental literature and are relatively easy to treat. The same is not true for the third situation, where the decision to keep the temporary teeth considerably increases the difficulty of prosthetic restoration. This subject will be illustrated by the presentation of a clinical case of multiple bi-maxillary agenesia. The patient has: on the maxilla: an absence of 9 permanent teeth (18, 15, 14, 12, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28) and the presence of 4 deciduous teeth (62, 63, 64, 65), on the mandible: an absence of all permanent teeth, with the exception of 36 and 46, and the remaining of 4 deciduous teeth (75, 73, 83, 84). The remaining of deciduous teeth and the presence of a very high inter-arch space led to opting for dental coverage so as to keep the deciduous teeth and a proper vertical dimension. The patient wished to solve his "problem" in the maxilla first, and is not wanting to undergo the extraction of his deciduous teeth. The following therapeutic proposal was adapted: On the maxilla, a three-step procedure: first step: building of metal copings on 13, 16 and 26 and metal-ceramic crowns on 11 and 21, second step: building of telescop crowns on 16 and 26 and clasps on 13, 11 and 21, third step: casting of the removable partial denture framework and soldering to the telescop crowns and clasps. On the mandible, a provisional restoration using a supra-dental resin removable partial denture with ceramic occlusal surfaces was adopted. The aesthetic and functional improvement, as well as the comfort provided to the patient due to this kind of mixed prosthesis, appeared to be satisfactory.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

A prospective study evaluating a protocol for 6 weeks' loading of SLA implants in the posterior maxilla: one year results.

Experimental and clinical studies have shown that modification of implant surfaces can result in increased bone-to-implant contact at earlier times thus reducing the healing period between surgery and prosthesis. Sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) implants are in this category and have successfully undergone early loading in patients with good bone quality and quantity. Nevertheless, premature loading of SLA implants was not routinely possible in predominantly trabecular bone, such as the posterior maxilla, as it is often characterized by a deficiency in initial bone to implant contact. The purpose of this prospective clinical investigation is to evaluate the efficacy of a modified surgical protocol followed by loading SLA implants at 6 weeks in the posterior maxilla. Drilling was limited to the minimum, and most of the site preparation was produced with osteotomes. Screw tapping was never performed and primary stability was always achieved. Abutment connection was carried out at 15 Ncm 43 (+/- 1) days after surgery and provisional restoration was fabricated. Further abutment tightening at 35 Ncm was performed after an additional 6 weeks. Of the 36 SLA implants placed in 19 patients, one was lost before final restoration. Clinical and radiographic measures were taken at baseline and 1 year postoperatively. The preliminary results suggest that, by means of the surgical and restorative technique presented, SLA implants are suitable for loading at 6 weeks in the posterior maxilla. More years of observation will verify whether osseointegration can be equally maintained over a long period.

Acid Etching, Dental↗
PubMed2003

Bone contact, growth, and density around immediately loaded implants in the mandible of mini pigs.

The aim of the study was to compare the bone mineral apposition rate (BMAR) of immediately loaded implants with an unloaded control during the early healing phase in the partially edentulous mandible. In seven mini pigs, three premolars and the first molar were removed in the left mandible. Three months later, five implants were installed. Four implants received a fixed provisional restoration and were loaded immediately. The most anterior implant was used as unloaded control. Polychromatic fluorescence labelling was performed to assess the BMAR. After 4 months, the implants were retrieved together with the adjacent bone. Histological specimens were prepared and subjected to a fluorescence microscopic and histomorphometric analysis. Two provisional restorations were found partially lost at the end of the observation period. One implant that had lost the splinting fixation showed soft connective tissue healing. The BMAR did not differ statistically significantly between loaded and unloaded implants and within the single groups during the observation period (BMARloaded days 14-42=1.8+/-0.2 microm/d, BMARloaded days 42-70=1.8+/-0.1 microm/d, BMARloaded days 70-98=1.6+/-0.1 microm/d, pBMARloaded days 14-42/42-70/70-98 =0.156, BMARunloaded days 14-42=1.7+/-0.1 microm/d, BMARunloaded days 42-70=1.8+/-0.2 microm/d, BMARunloaded days 70-98=1.6+/-0.4 microm/d, pBMARunloaded days 14-42/42-70/70-98=0.368, pBMARloaded/unloaded days 14-42=0.073, pBMARloaded/unloaded days 42-70=0.098, pBMARloaded/unloaded days 70-98=0.262). Four months after implant placement, the bone-to-implant contact was 77.8+/-17.3% for the loaded and 78.0+/-5.8% for the unloaded implants (P=0.753). Immediate loading does not affect the bone mineral apposition rate when compared with unloaded implants. Rigid splinting seems to be the crucial factor for implant success. Uncontrolled masticatory forces can cause failure after partial loss of the provisional restoration.

Animals↗
PubMed2002

Planning restorative treatment for patients with severe Class II malocclusions.

This article describes a clinical protocol for the occlusal rehabilitation of patients with severe Angle skeletal Class II malocclusions. Within this protocol, an occlusal device is used for 2 purposes: first, to locate the most suitable maxillary-mandibular relationship for function and range of motion at an established vertical dimension of occlusion; and second, to accurately transfer this relationship to an articulator for fabrication of provisional and definitive restorations. The theory behind this protocol and its associated clinical procedures is presented along with a discussion of the protocol's advantages and disadvantages.

Centric Relation↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of implant-supported fixed partial dentures.

The major disadvantage of cement-retained implant-supported fixed partial dentures (FPDs) is difficulty in retrievability. The retentive strengths of the provisional luting agents usually employed in these cases are therefore an important consideration. This study evaluated the cement failure loads of 4 provisional luting agents used for the cementation of FPDs supported by 2 implants or 4 implants. Nogenol luting agent exhibited the lowest retentive values in both types of FPD. ImProv proved to be the most retentive cement of all tested. Temp Bond NE and Temp Bond presented significantly different values (P < .05) for the 2-implant FPD, but not for the 4-implant model. On the basis of the study results, it may be concluded that Nogenol appears to be more appropriate for cementation of both 2- and 4-implant-supported FPDs when removal of the provisionally cemented superstructure is anticipated.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Cement-retained implant-supported fixed partial dentures: a 6-month to 3-year follow-up.

This study presents a follow-up of 92 implant-supported fixed partial dentures that have been cement retained for 6 months up to 3 years. Included in the study were 41 women and 29 men. A total of 225 implants were placed (86 in the maxilla and 139 in the mandible). Fixed partial dentures, including single-tooth restorations, were temporarily cemented using Temp-Bond or IRM. Complications encountered were cement washout, procelain fracture, loose central screws, and implant failure. This study suggests an alternative to screw-retained prostheses; the method presented may lower the reported complications.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Retrospective audit of patients with advanced toothwear restored with removable partial dentures.

The dental records of 50 patients with advanced tooth wear restored with removable prostheses were examined. Retrospective data were collected with regard to source of referral, presenting complaint, aetiological factors, clinical features, dentures provided, details of failures and maintenance. The maximum follow up period was three years. The ratio of male to female patients was 4:1 and the age range 31-75 years. Failures were recorded in 38% of patients with provisional and 64% with definitive dentures. The most common failure was fracture or wear of the incisal or occlusal surfaces. The majority of failures were addressed by adjustment of the dentures and the audit confirmed the need for regular maintenance.

Adult↗