The developments in the field of rehabilitation are proceeding hand in hand with those of cybernetics, with the result of obtaining increasingly performing prostheses and rehabilitations for patients. The purpose of this work is to make a brief exposition of new technologies regarding composites materials that are used in the prosthetic and rehabilitative fields. Data collection took place on scientific databases, limited to a collection of data for the last five years, in order to present news on the innovative and actual materials. The results show that some of the most commonly used last materials are glass fibers and carbon fibers. Even in the robotics field, materials of this type are beginning to be used, thanks above all to the mechanical performances they offer. Surely these new materials, which offer characteristics similar to those in humans, could favor both the rehabilitation times of our patients, and also a better quality of life.

Metal alloys are one of the most popular materials used in current dental practice. In the oral cavity, metal structures are exposed to various mechanical and chemical factors. Consequently, metal ions are released into the oral fluid, which may negatively affect the surrounding tissues and even internal organs. Adverse effects associated with metallic oral appliances may have various local and systemic manifestations, such as mouth burning, potentially malignant oral lesions, and local or systemic hypersensitivity. However, clear diagnostic criteria and treatment guidelines for adverse effects associated with dental alloys have not been developed yet. The present comprehensive literature review aims (1) to summarize the current information related to possible side effects of metallic oral appliances; (2) to analyze the risk factors aggravating the negative effects of dental alloys; and (3) to develop recommendations for diagnosis, management, and prevention of pathological conditions associated with metallic oral appliances.

Early diagnosis of oral cancer through visual inspection followed by histopathological confirmation is a pivotal step for reducing rates of morbidity and mortality. There are several auxiliary devices used to improve oral examination. The purpose of this cross-sectional pilot study is to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the Visually Enhance Lesion Scope (VelScope) system when it is used by the general dentist after a yearly oral medicine training. Thirty-five patients with oral lesions were evaluated with clinical and VelScope examination by two general dentists, one of which trained with a specific course. A comparison of the histopathological results, clinical examination, and VelScope made by both dentists was performed through statistical analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for detecting oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) are 53.3%, 65%, 53.3%, 76.5% for unskilled dentist, 73.3%, 65%, 61.1%, 76.5% for skilled clinician. When both examiners use VelScope the values are 53.3%, 70%, 57.1%, 66.7% for unskilled general dentist (u-GD), 86.7%, 90%, 86.7%, 90% for skilled general dentist (s-GD). Improvement of a skilled general dentist for detecting malignancies is higher than inexperienced examiner when using VelScope. VelScope alone is unable to improve the general dentist’s ability to detect malignancies, but it could be a useful adjunctive device for clinicians when a focused training program is performed.

The pulp and periodontium have obvious relationships that have been described in many studies. Pulp infections may affect periodontal tissues and vice versa. Teeth with endo-perio lesions have a worse prognosis than isolated endodontic or periodontal lesions. Elimination of endodontic and periodontal infections is essential for successful treatment, so co-operation between endodontists and periodontists is necessary. In this clinical case, a 44-year-old male presented with primary periodontal disease with secondary endodontic involvement in his lower right canine because of aggressive periodontitis. There was 10 mm of clinical attachment loss and 8 mm periodontal pocket mesial from the tooth and bone radiolucency periapical and lateral from the root. Periodontal therapy was followed by endodontic treatment. Periodontal therapy included root scaling and planing, treatment of the periodontal pocket with ozone gas, systemic antibiotics, oral hygiene instructions, and chlorhexidine rinsing. Endodontic therapy included root canal instrumentation with rotary endodontic files, irrigation, root canal treatment with ozone gas, and obturation with lateral compaction. Radiographs at a 6-month follow-up appointment showed complete healing of the periapical lesion and alveolar bone lateral to the root. Using an interdisciplinary approach to treat endo-perio lesions provides favorable clinical outcomes. Ozone therapy is beneficial for the successful treatment of endo-perio lesions with narrow periodontal pockets in patients with aggressive periodontitis and poor prognosis.

To evaluate by means of a systematic review the survival rate of composite resin restorations in the long-term period and the main factors, affecting the quality of restorations. An electronic search was performed in eLIBRARY.RU, PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus. Restriction period was 2007-2017 years. The eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and prospective and retrospective cohort studies with at least 3 years of follow-up. The initial search resulted in 328 articles after an initial assessment and careful reading, 17 studies were included in this review. The overall survival rate of composite restorations was 90.7% after 3 years, 89.5% after 5 years, 89.3% after 7 years and 75.6% after 10 years. The highest loss rate was for class II restorations at molars. However there was not enough information about class III and IV restorations and direct veneers. According to majority of publications, type of composite resin material and adhesive system do not affect the survival rate of restorations. The main risk factors of failure are smoking, beverages consumption, bruxism, xerostomia and low level of caries resistance. The results of this review suggest that composite resin restorations can demonstrate clinically acceptable results in the long-term period. In case of compliance with treatment protocol the longevity of composite resin restoration is more than 15 years.