The biomedical applications of silicones are countless due to their outstanding properties. In dentistry, silicone for maxillofacial and plastic surgery has become indispensable, from both physiological and aesthetic points of view. In this mini-review, silicone materials for dentistry and facial prostheses are discussed, focusing on their properties and alterations when exposed for long periods to different environments. A significant number of studies reported in the literature have been conducted in vitro, mimicking some of the main degradative factors which have been identified as triggers for discoloration and deterioration of the mechanical properties. Among these, in artificial aging and accelerated natural aging studies, UV radiation is considered the most important. Other weathering factors, biological contamination, and disinfection agents may have dramatic effects as well. Several general properties of silicones are described at the beginning, with a focus on biocompatibility, cross-linking mechanisms, and applications in dentistry and maxillofacial prosthetics. We discuss the ongoing cross-linking and/or possible exudation after manufacturing, which also affects the stability of the prosthesis over time, and possibly the patient. Next, the main environmental factors that affect the prostheses in service are presented, including the role of cigarettes smoke, which has been discussed very little so far. A few aspects, such as biofilm formation, its negative effects, and proposed solutions to overcome this phenomenon regarding silicones, are also described. We conclude by proposing a set of topics for future research and development based on the gaps that have been identified in the literature. Although silicones are probably irreplaceable in maxillofacial prosthetics, improvements in terms of base materials, additives, surface treatments, and maintenance are possible and necessary for long-lasting and safer prostheses.

Background and Objectives: Dental anxiety can hinder both treatment delivery and dental education. Few studies have examined this issue among Romanian dental students. This study assessed the prevalence, intensity, and main procedural triggers of dental anxiety, with a focus on experiences related to local anesthesia. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted (January–May 2024) among 122 fourth-year students using the validated Romanian version of the Modified Dental Anxiety Scale (MDAS) and additional items on demographics, prior anesthesia and perceived complications. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and t-tests. Results: Overall, 21.3% of respondents scored in the low anxiety range, 75.4% in the moderate range, and 3.3% in the severe range (MDAS ≥ 19). No significant gender differences were identified (p > 0.05). Injections with local anesthetic were rated as the most distressing procedure, followed by drilling, whereas scaling was reported as least stressful. The majority (86.9%) had undergone previous local anesthesia, with very few adverse events recalled. Conclusions: Romanian dental students reported moderate dental anxiety overall, with local anesthesia injections as the main trigger. The lack of gender differences points to a potential buffering effect of clinical exposure. Incorporating structured anxiety management into dental curricula may enhance both student well-being and patient care.

Background and Objectives: Anxiety in dental settings can hinder both treatment delivery and educational experiences. For students in training, fear of specific procedures, particularly local anesthesia, may persist despite progressive clinical exposure. Evidence on this issue among Romanian dental students is scarce. This study aimed to assess the prevalence, intensity, and main procedural triggers of dental anxiety among Romanian dental students, with a specific focus on experiences related to local anesthesia. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted between January and May 2024 on 122 fourth-year students (79 females, 43 males) enrolled at the Faculty of Dental Medicine, “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Iași, Romania. Participants completed the validated Romanian version of the Modified Dental Anxiety Scale (MDAS) and answered additional items on demographic factors, prior exposure to local anesthesia, perceived complications, and procedures most likely to trigger anxiety. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and t-tests. Results: Overall, 21.3% of respondents scored in the low anxiety range, 75.4% in the moderate range, and 3.3% in the severe range (MDAS ≥19). No significant gender differences were identified (p > 0.05). Injections with local anesthetic were rated as the most distressing procedure (mean 2.29 ± 1.02), followed by drilling, whereas scaling was reported as least stressful. The majority (86.9%) had undergone previous local anesthesia, with very few adverse events recalled. Conclusions: The findings show that Romanian dental students experience mostly moderate levels of anxiety, with local anesthesia injections remaining the dominant trigger. The lack of gender differences points to a potential buffering effect of clinical exposure. These results support the inclusion of structured anxiety management within dental education and provide context-specific data for comparison with international cohorts.

Background: Orthognathic surgery using the Surgery-First approach (SFA) has gained increasing attention not only for its functional and aesthetic benefits but also for its potential psychological impact. Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of SFA on the psychological well-being of patients with dentofacial anomalies and temporomandibular disorders (TMD), using validated tools for assessing anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9), and pain catastrophizing (PCS). Materials and methods: A longitudinal observational study was conducted on 27 patients treated between 2022 and 2025. TMD was assessed using the DC/TMD clinical criteria. Psychological status was evaluated preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively using the GAD-7, PHQ-9, and PCS standardized questionnaires. Results: Significant reductions were observed in all three domains: GAD-7 scores dropped from 13.8 to 4.1 (p < 0.001), PHQ-9 from 15.5 to 5.3 (p < 0.001), and PCS from 26.2 to 12.7 (p < 0.001). These are raw total scores; corresponding normalized mean scores (per item) decreased from 2.78 to 1.08 for GAD-7, from 3.00 to 0.36 for PHQ-9, and from 1.22 to 1.06 for PCS. The greatest improvements were seen in Class III patients with TMD. Psychological scores did not significantly predict persistent TMD. Conclusions: These findings support the psychological benefits of SFA and underline the importance of integrating psychological screening into orthognathic treatment planning.