The effect of printing parameters on the surface characteristics of three-dimensional (3D)-printed denture base resins (DBRs) is neglected. Therefore, this study investigated the effect of printing orientation and post-curing time on the surface roughness and hardness. One conventional heat-polymerized (HP) resin and two 3D-printing resins (NextDent (ND) and ASIGA (AS)) were used to fabricate a total of 250-disc (10 × 2.5 mm) specimens. ND and AS specimens were printed with different orientations (0-, 45-, and 90-degree) and each orientation group was subjected to four post-curing times (30, 60, 90, 120 min). Printed specimens were thermo-cycled (10,000 cycles) followed by the measuring of surface roughness (Profilometer (Ra)) and hardness (a Vickers hardness (VH)). ANOVA and post hoc tests were used for data analysis (α = 0.05) at significant levels. AS and ND showed no significant changes in Ra when compared with HP (p ˃ 0.05), except the 45-degree orientation (AS/90 min and AS/120 min) significantly increased surface roughness (p ˂ 0.001). There was no significant difference in Ra with different orientations and post-curing time for both materials AS and ND (p ˃ 0.05). Compared with HP, 3D-printed DBRs showed low VH values (p ˂ 0.001). For AS, 90-degree orientation showed a significant decrease in VH at 60, 90, and 120 min when compared with 0- and 45-degree orientation (p ˂ 0.001), while ND showed no significant difference in VH with different printing orientations (p ˃ 0.05). The VH of AS and ND improved when increasing post-curing time to 120 min (p ˂ 0.001), and the printing orientations and post-curing time did not affect the Ra of 3D-printed DBRs.

The aim of the study is to assess the impact of mechanical surface treatments on the shear bond strength (SBS) of orthodontic brackets bonded to three-dimensional (3D) printed and milled CAD/CAM provisional materials. Sixty cylindrical samples were fabricated for each provisional material. Samples were treated with one of the following surface treatments: aluminum oxide airborne particle abrasion, diamond bur rotary instrument roughening, and phosphoric acid etching (control). Stainless steel brackets were bonded to the samples, and then SBS was tested using a universal testing machine. SEM and digital microscopy were utilized to examine the bonding interface and the failure modes. Two-way ANOVA, one-way ANOVA, Tukey’s HSD, and independent sample t-tests were used for statistical analysis. Results revealed significant differences in SBS between 3D printed and milled samples and significant differences in SBS among most surface treatments, with rotary instrument roughening resulting in the highest values for 3D printed, while airborne particle abrasion leading for milled samples. Digital microscopy indicated that more adhesive remained on 3D-printed samples. SEM analysis revealed varying surface roughness across treatments. Based on the findings of this study, it can be concluded that different surface treatments improve the bonding of orthodontic brackets to provisional crowns.

Background: To date, little is known about the salivary mucosal immune response following different COVID-19 vaccine types or after a booster (3rd) dose of the BNT162b2 (BNT) vaccine. Methods: A total of 301 saliva samples were collected from vaccinated individuals and arranged into two cohorts: cohort 1 (n = 145), samples from individuals who had received two doses against SARS-CoV-2; cohort 2 (n = 156), samples from individuals who had received a booster of BNT vaccine. Cohorts 1 and 2 were sub-stratified into three groups based on the types of first and second doses (homologous BNT/BNT, homologous ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1, or heterologous BNT/ChAdOx1vaccinations). Salivary immunoglobulin G (IgG) response to SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein was measured by ELISA, and clinical demographic data were collected from hospital records or questionnaires. Results: Salivary IgG antibody responses against different vaccines, whether homologous or heterogeneous vaccination regimens, showed similar levels in cohorts 1 and 2. Compiling all groups in cohort 1 and 2 showed significant, albeit weak, negative correlations between salivary IgG levels and time (r = −0.2, p = 0.03; r = −0.27, p = 0.003, respectively). In cohort 2, the durability of salivary IgG after a booster dose of BNT162b2 significantly dropped after 3 months compared to the <1 month and 1–3 months groups. Conclusions: Different COVID-19 vaccine types and regimens elicit similar salivary anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG with modest waning over time. Boosting with BNT162b2 vaccine did not produce an evident increase in mucosal IgG response whereby COVID-19 recovered subjects show higher salivary IgG than naive, post-vaccination subjects. The ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1 regimen showed better correlation between salivary IgG levels and durability. These findings highlight the importance of developing oral or intra-nasal vaccines to induce stronger mucosal immunity.

Background and Objectives: Despite the identified benefits of early implant loading, studies have questioned its advantages compared to delayed loading in edentulous patients. This study aimed to evaluate clinical peri-implant parameters and marginal bone loss around early placed and loaded mandibular implant overdentures with a 60-month follow-up. Materials and Methods: In this prospective cohort study, 43 patients were enrolled to receive 86 early loading sub-crestal dental implants through prosthetic guides. Implant overdentures were supported by two isolated implant locator attachments between two mental foramens. Clinical peri-implant parameters, including plaque index (PI), bleeding index (BI), peri-implant pocket depth (PIPD), and marginal bone loss (MBL) were evaluated using standardized techniques at 1, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months follow-up. At 60 months, complications associated with implant overdentures (IOD’s) were noted. The mean comparison of peri-implant clinical parameters was performed through ANOVA test. A p-value of ≤0.05 was taken as significant. Results: Out of the total 43 enrolled patients, 8 patients were lost during follow-up; as a result, 35 patients completed the 5 years follow-up. The mean values of PI, BI, and PIPD increased with no statistical difference (p > 0.05). For marginal bone loss, an increase in the mean values was noted at different time intervals with statistical differences (p < 0.001). The most common complications noted were loosening of the abutment, occlusal adjustment, retentive locator loosening and replacement, and relining of the denture. Conclusions: Early placement of IODs failed to prevent bone loss over time and was associated with complications, predominantly consisting of abutment loosening, occlusal adjustments, broken retentive locator components, relining, and rebasing.

Proximal contact loss (PCL) between implant restorations and neighboring natural teeth can lead to interproximal caries and other dental problems. This review assessed the frequency of interproximal caries on teeth adjacent to implants and implant infraocclusion across different age groups. Factors influencing PCL, including implant placement and adjustments for patient age and gender, were evaluated. The review also examined the impact of implants on surrounding bone and oral microbiota. Understanding these effects helps guide implant planning and follow-up care, aiming to reduce complications, preserve the integrity of neighboring teeth, and maintain overall oral health. Implants can trigger local inflammation and microbial imbalance, leading to bone loss around adjacent natural teeth and potentially increasing caries risk. Interproximal contact loss (PCL) between implants and neighboring teeth is common and heightens susceptibility to interproximal caries, affecting oral health. Factors such as implant placement, follow-up duration, and microbial changes influence PCL development and its consequences. Timely implant placement and consideration of patient age and gender are essential to manage growth-related changes. Proper treatment strategies combined with regular monitoring help minimize risks, maintain interproximal integrity, and protect oral health, ensuring implant restorations function effectively without compromising adjacent natural teeth.