A Micro-CT Analysis of Initial and Long-Term Pores Volume and Porosity of Bioactive Endodontic Sealers

Biconometric Connections in Dental Implants: A Pilot Mechanical Study

BACKGROUND

In dental implants, micro-gaps at the fixation-abutment interface can cause peri-implantitis and/or loosening or loss of the fixation screw; therefore, three-dimensional imaging is widely used to examine different types of connections. In the present study, we focus on the analysis on biconometric connections to detect and (possibly) measure the presence of micro-gaps in the as-positioned state and after repeated loading and unloading.

METHODS

Seven biconometric dental implants were characterized using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT). In two specimens (group 1), the cap was inserted, and only the apical portion was imaged, to evaluate the cap-abutment connection; in the remaining five specimens (group 2), the fixture-abutment connection was analyzed. Two implants in group 2 were also subjected to load tests to verify whether stresses could induce the formation of micro-gaps as a consequence of preload loss.

RESULTS

Micro-CT analysis showed the absence of micro-gaps greater than 10 µm in both cap-abutment and abutment-fixture connections. This was verified, in the fixture-abutment connection, even after mechanical loading and unloading. The results were reproducible in all the investigated samples in the different experimental conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

In the human force range during chewing, the conical connection showed a high level of resistance to micro-gap formation at the implant-abutment interface. The absence of micro-gaps, as demonstrated here, provides encouraging preliminary data regarding the stability of the biconometric connections, which will be further verified in follow-up studies on a larger sample size.

Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of bioceramic root canal sealers compared to conventional resin-based sealer

The aim of this study was to evaluate cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of calcium-silicate based sealers and comparing them with a gold standard-an epoxy-based sealant. Two experimental cell lines were used, gingival fibroblasts (hGF) and monocyte/macrophage peripheral blood cell line (SC). The cytotoxicity (XTT assay) and genotoxicity (comet assay) were evaluated both after 24-h and 48-h incubation. Additionally, after 48-h incubation, the cell apoptosis and cell cycle progression was detected. BioRoot Flow induced a significant decrease in hGF cells viability compared to the negative control groups both after 24-h (p < 0.001) and 48-h incubation (p < 0.01). In group with SC cells, after 24-h incubation significant increase in cells viability was detected for AH Plus Bioceramic Sealer in comparison to negative control (p < 0.05). BioRoot Flow and BioRoot RCS can be considered potentially genotoxic for the hGF cells after 48-h incubation (> 20% DNA damage). BioRoot Flow and BioRoot RCS, may have potential genotoxic effects and induce apoptosis in hGF cells which may irritate periapical tissues, resulting in a delayed healing. The findings of the study would be useful in selection of an appropriate sealant for root canal filling without causing cytotoxicity and genotoxicity.

Micro-CT Evaluation of Microgaps at Implant-Abutment Connection

The assessment of microgaps at the implant-abutment interface is an important factor that may influence clinical success. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the size of microgaps between prefabricated and customised abutments (Astra Tech, Dentsply, York, PA, USA; Apollo Implants Components, Pabianice, Poland) mounted on a standard implant. The measurement of the microgap was performed using micro-computed tomography (MCT). Due to 15-degree rotation of samples, 24 microsections were obtained. Scans were performed at four levels established at the interface between the abutment and the implant neck. Moreover, the volume of the microgap was evaluated. The size of the microgap at all measured levels varied from 0.1 to 3.7 µm for Astra and from 0.1 to 4.9 µm for Apollo (p > 0.05). Moreover, 90% of the Astra specimens and 70% of the Apollo specimens did not exhibit any microgaps. The highest mean values of microgap size for both groups were detected at the lowest portion of the abutment (p > 0.05). Additionally, the average microgap volume was greater for Apollo than for Astra (p > 0.05). It can be concluded that most samples did not exhibit any microgaps. Furthermore, the linear and volumetric dimensions of microgaps observed at the interface between Apollo or Astra abutments and Astra implants were comparable. Additionally, all tested components presented microgaps (if any) that were clinically acceptable. However, the microgap size of the Apollo abutment was higher and more variable than that of the Astra one.