Objective: The primary objective of the present retrospective clinical study was to evaluate and compare the clinical performance presented by castable abutments developed for the MT system versus intermediate machined abutments, specifically regarding prosthetic or implant fractures/loss; the secondary objective was to verify the looseness of the abutments and the behavior of the peri-implant soft tissues. Methods: This clinical retrospective study was conducted on patients rehabilitated between 2019 and 2020. Inclusion criteria were patients in good general health, with an implants-supporting single crown; with solid machined abutments (control group) or castable UCLA abutments; with a connection portion (base) machined in cobalt-chrome (test group) over Morse taper DuoCone implants in the posterior mandible area; and at least two years in function. Clinical assessment was carried out by the same professional, considering the following parameters: (A) prosthetic: (i) loosening of the fixation screw, (ii) fracture of the screw and (iii) the number of times the patient had some type of complication after the installation of the prostheses were evaluated; (B) biological: (i) without keratinized mucosa (KM), (ii) 1 mm or less, (iii) between 1 and 2 mm and (iv) greater than 2 mm of KM width; and the presence or absence of mucositis. Furthermore, radiographic evaluation was performed in order to assess the marginal bone loss. These evaluations permitted to compare the groups analyzed and patients enrolled. Data were statistically analyzed, with the level of significance set at α = 0.05. Results: 79 patients with 120 MT implants were evaluated (80 castable UCLA abutments and 40 machined solid abutments). The follow-up was from 2 to 4 years. There was a 100% implant survival rate. Therefore, the control group showed two fractured abutments (5%) and no abutment loosening (95% for prosthetic survival rate), whereas the test group showed no abutment fracture but nine loosening screws (11.3%) (100% for prosthetic survival rate). Keratinized mucosa was considered thin or absent in 19 implants in the control group (47.5%) and 42 in the test group (52.5%). Mucositis was found in 11 implants in the control group (27.5%) and 27 in the test group (33.8%). A positive correlation was observed between the width of keratinized mucosa and mucositis (r = 0.521, p = 0.002). The mean marginal bone loss was 2.3 mm, ranging from 1.1 to 5.8 mm. No correlation was observed when considering marginal bone loss versus the three parameters (implant diameter, implant length and time of the prosthesis in function). Conclusions: The results suggest that UCLA-type abutments are a viable option for rehabilitating implants with Morse taper connections, suggesting lower fracture risk. Further research is necessary to confirm these findings and thoroughly evaluate the clinical performance and long-term outcomes. Full article

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the load transmitted to the peri-implant bone by seven different restorative materials in single-unit rehabilitations with morse taper implants using a strain gauge. Materials: In a polyurethane block that simulated type III bone, a morse taper platform implant was installed (3.5 × 11 mm) in the center and 1 mm below the test base surface, and four strain gauges were installed around the implant, simulating the mesial, distal, buccal and lingual positions. Seven similar hybrid abutment crowns were crafted to simulate a lower premolar using different materials: 1—PMMA; 2—glass ceramic over resin matrix; 3—PEEK + lithium disilicate; 4—metal–ceramic; 5—lithium disilicate; 6—zirconia + feldspathic; 7—monolithic zirconia. All groups underwent axial and oblique loads (45 degrees) of 150 N from a universal testing machine. Five measurements (n = 5) were performed with each material and for each load type; the microdeformation data underwent statistical analysis. The data were obtained in microdeformation (με), and the significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the evaluation among the materials under either the axial load or the oblique load at 45 degrees. In turn, in the comparison between axial load and oblique load, there was a difference in load for all materials. Conclusion: The restorative material did not influence the load transmitted to the bone. Furthermore, the load transmitted to the bone was greater when it occurred obliquely at 45° regardless of the material used. In conclusion, it appeared that the different elastic modulus of each material did not influence the load transmission to the peri-implant bone. Full article

Background and Objectives: Recognizing the significance of a hermetic apical seal for successful root canal treatment, the present investigation aimed to evaluate two sealing materials through an in vitro analysis, as well as to ascertain the clinical outcomes of patients treated with these two sealers in an in vivo setting. Materials and Methods: For the in vitro part of the study, two control groups of thirty monoradicular teeth were obturated with two sealers. Then, the sealers’ performance was tested based on a predefined protocol. Group A included 30 patients treated with an epoxy oligomer resin-based sealer (Adseal, MetaBiomed), while Group S comprised 30 patients treated with a polymeric calcium salicylate-based sealer (Sealapex, Kerr). Samples were sectioned and evaluated under the microscope to determine the sealer’s tightness by measuring the dye penetration into the root canal filling. For the in vivo part, a prospective study was designed to include 60 patients with chronic apical periodontitis in two endodontic treatment groups, using the same two sealers. Results: The in vitro analysis found that dye penetration in Group A was 0.82 mm (±0.428), while in Group S, the dye penetration was statistically significantly deeper, being 1.23 mm (±0.353). In the in vivo part of the study, the periapical index (PAI) significantly decreased 6 months after endodontic treatment, with 80.0% of patients in Group A having a PAI score of 2 compared to only 56.7% in Group S (p-value = 0.018). Similarly, tooth mobility scores significantly decreased after treatment, but with no difference between groups. The marginal bone loss decreased significantly more in the Adseal group compared to the Sealapex group (23.3% vs. 50.0%, p-value = 0.032). At the same time, 40.0% of patients in Group S had failed tooth healing compared to only 13.3% in Group A (p-value = 0.048). Conclusions: The in vitro study showed that Adseal had a better sealing capacity and a lower degree of dye penetration compared to Sealapex. However, on clinical evaluation in the in vivo study, both patient groups exhibited significant improvements in periapical index, tooth mobility scores, and pain reduction following endodontic treatment. Nevertheless, patients treated with Adseal showed a significantly greater improvement in PAI values, tooth mobility, and teeth healing after treatment. Overall, Adseal, as an endodontic sealer, may provide better sealing capabilities and enhanced clinical outcomes in the treatment of chronic apical periodontitis. Full article