Submit to Materials Review for Materials Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser

Polymeric Materials for Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstructive Treatment

Print Special Issue Flyer
Special Issue Editors
Special Issue Information
Keywords
Published Papers

A special issue of Materials (ISSN 1996-1944). This special issue belongs to the section "Biomaterials".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (20 February 2023) | Viewed by 18634

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Dr. João Paulo Mendes Tribst

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Department of Dental Materials, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 LA Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Interests: dental implants; finite element analysis; biomechanics; bond strength; fatigue; partial restorations; intraradicular retainer
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Prof. Dr. Muhammad Sohail Zafar

E-Mail Website1 Website2
Co-Guest Editor

Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Taibah University, Al Madina Al Munawara 41311, Saudi Arabia
Interests: dental biomaterials; natural polymers; molecular biology; electrospinning; oral tissue regeneration; nanotechnology; biomolecules; clinical dentistry
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Dr. Mohmed Isaqali Karobari

E-Mail Website
Co-Guest Editor

Conservative Dentistry Unit, School of Dental Sciences, University Sains Malaysia, Health Campus, Kubang Kerian, Kota Bharu 16150, Malaysia
Interests: conservative dentistry; endodontics; restorative dentistry; endodontics
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Dr. Artak Heboyan

E-Mail Website
Assistant Guest Editor

Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Stomatology, Yerevan State Medical University after Mkhitar Heratsi, Str. Koryun 2, Yerevan 0025, Armenia
Interests: dental biomaterials; clinical dentistry; prosthodontics; dental implantology

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Nowadays, polymeric biomaterials can be successfully applied in various medical spheres and especially in dentistry. There is a wide variety of polymeric materials indicated in the treatment of dental and maxillofacial diseases and defects, such as dental caries, complete and partial edentulousness, maxillofacial defects, and many other pathological conditions and abnormalities. The desirable characteristic features of polymers, such as biocompatibility, easy handling, and having a fast process for their manufacture associated with relative low cost, have increased their popularity for application in the production of various dental and maxillofacial restorations. In particular, the application of polymeric materials in the oral cavity due to their drug delivery capability and antimicrobial properties should be highlighted in addition to their use in preventive, reconstructive, and regenerative therapies.

With the aid of 3D printing technologies, new promising alternatives in dentistry and medical fields are emerging with improved functionality compared to the current biomaterials. These new 3D printing resin materials offer improved physical, mechanical, and antibacterial characteristics for oral and medical appliances. However, there is lack of data to fulfill the knowledge of polymeric biomaterials for oral and maxillofacial reconstructive treatment. Therefore, this Special Issue invites researchers and clinicians specializing in material sciences, dentistry, medicine, 3D printing, and CAD/CAM to submit their findings as scientific articles.

The aim of this Special issue is to highlight the latest achievements in the field of polymeric sciences in oral and maxillofacial reconstructive treatment. We invite authors to provide their submissions in the form of original research articles, in vitro studies, in silico analyses, review articles, short communications, technical notes, study protocols, and clinical trials.

Dr. João-Paulo-Mendes Tribst
Guest Editor

Prof. Dr. Muhammad Zafar
Dr. Mohmed Isaqali Karobari
co-Guest Editor

Dr. Artak Heboyan
Assistant Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Materials is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

dental biomaterials
dental polymers
dental adhesives
resin composites
impression materials
mechanical properties
reconstructive dentistry
stress analysis
PEEK
PEKK
PMMA

Published Papers (7 papers)

Download All Papers

Order results

Result details

Show export options Show export options

Select all

Export citation of selected articles as:

Editorial

Jump to: Research, Review

3 pages, 218 KiB

Open AccessEditorial

Insights into Polymeric Materials for Prosthodontics and Dental Implantology

by Artak Heboyan, Muhammad Sohail Zafar, Mohmed Isaqali Karobari and João Paulo Mendes Tribst

Materials 2022, 15(15), 5383; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15155383 - 04 Aug 2022

Cited by 17 | Viewed by 1746

Abstract

Nowadays, a large variety of prostheses both in medicine and dentistry are increasingly made of polymers and polymer-based materials [...] Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Polymeric Materials for Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstructive Treatment)

Research

Jump to: Editorial, Review

18 pages, 3629 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Fatigue and Fracture Resistance Testing of Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) Implant Abutments in an Ex Vivo Chewing Simulator Model

by Babak Saravi, Anselm Flohr, Sebastian B. Patzelt, Benedikt C. Spies, Derek Hazard and Ralf J. Kohal

Materials 2022, 15(19), 6927; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15196927 - 06 Oct 2022

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 1807

Abstract

Polyether ether ketone (PEEK) has been introduced into implant dentistry as a viable alternative to current implant abutment materials. However, data on its physico-mechanical properties are still scarce. The present study sought to shed light on this topic utilizing an ex vivo chewing simulator model. A total of 48 titanium two-piece implants were allocated into three groups (n = 16 per group): (1) implants with PEEK abutments and an internal butt-joint connection (PBJ), (2) implants with PEEK abutments and an internal conical implant–abutment connection (PC), and (3) implants with zirconia abutments and an internal butt-joint connection (ZA). All abutments were restored with a non-precious metal alloy crown mimicking the upper right central incisor. A dynamic chewing simulation of half (n = 8) of the specimens per group was performed with 5 × 106 cycles and a load of 49 N at a frequency of 1.7 Hz with thermocycling between 5 and 55 °C. The other eight specimens served as unloaded controls. Surface roughness, implant–abutment connection microgaps (IACMs), and the titanium base–abutment interface microgaps (TAIMs) in the loaded groups were evaluated. Finally, a quasi-static loading test was performed in a universal testing machine with all samples to evaluate fracture resistance. Overall, 23 samples survived the artificial chewing process. One abutment screw fracture was observed in the PC group. The ZA group showed higher surface roughness values than PEEK abutments. Furthermore, ZA revealed lower TAIM values compared to PEEK abutments. Similarly, ZA was associated with lower IACM values compared to PBJ. Fracture loads/bending moments were 1018 N/704 N cm for PBJ, 966 N/676 N cm for PC, and 738 N/508 N cm for ZA, with no significant differences compared to the unloaded references. Artificial loading did not significantly affect fracture resistance of the examined materials. PEEK abutments were associated with better load-bearing properties than zirconia abutments, although they showed higher microgap values. PEEK abutments could, therefore, be feasible alternatives to zirconia abutments based on the present ex vivo findings resembling 20 years of clinical service. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Polymeric Materials for Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstructive Treatment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 13098 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Internal and Marginal Adaptation of Adhesive Resin Cements Used for Luting Inlay Restorations: An In Vitro Micro-CT Study

by Linah M. Ashy and Hanadi Marghalani

Materials 2022, 15(17), 6161; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15176161 - 05 Sep 2022

Cited by 6 | Viewed by 1586

Abstract

Adequate internal adaptation and marginal sealing of resin luting cements are of particular importance for the success of cemented ceramic inlays. The purpose of this study was to investigate the initial adaptation of different resin cements at the tooth-inlay restoration interface at enamel versus dentin surfaces. Thirty-two extracted human molars were allocated to four groups. One Class II cavity was prepared in each tooth. In each group, half of the cavities’ gingival floors were on enamel while the other halves were on cementum. Lava Ultimate CAD/CAM inlays were luted to the cavities using the following adhesive systems: RelyX Unicem, RelyX Ultimate, eCement, and Variolink Esthetic DC. After staining teeth with silver nitrate solution, marginal and internal gap volumes were determined using micro-CT images. Statistical analyses were conducted by independent t test and one-way ANOVA followed by post hoc Tukey test (p < 0.05). The internal and marginal gap volume values were the highest for Variolink Esthetic DC at the dentin surface (0.629 ± 0.363) and (2.519 ± 1.007), respectively, and the lowest for RelyX Unicem at the enamel surface (0.005 ± 0.004) and (0.009 ± 0.003), respectively. The internal and marginal adaptation on the enamel surface for RelyX Unicem and RelyX Ultimate resin cements were comparable to each other and to eCement but significantly better than Variolink Esthetic DC cement. Regardless of the adhesive resin system used, adaptation on enamel is superior to that on dentin surfaces. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Polymeric Materials for Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstructive Treatment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

7 pages, 244 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Effect of a 10-MDP-Based Dentin Adhesive as Alternative for Bonding to Implant Abutment Materials

by Paula C. K. Carvalho, Cláudia C M S Almeida, Rodrigo O. A. Souza and Rubens Nisie Tango

Materials 2022, 15(15), 5449; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15155449 - 08 Aug 2022

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1377

Abstract

Bonding to different dental restorative materials is challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a 10-MDP-based dentin adhesive on the shear bond strength (SBS) of self-adhesive resin cement (RC) to implant abutment materials. One hundred and twenty specimens were obtained from zirconia (ZO), cobalt-chromium alloy (CoCr), and commercially pure titanium (Ti), which were treated as follows (n = 10): control group—non-treated (CG), 10-MDP-based dentin adhesive (SB), light-cured SB (SB-LC), and zirconia primer (ZP). Blocks of RC were buildup and, after 24 h, were tested for bond strength. Data of SBS (MPa) were submitted to two-way ANOVA and Tukey test (α = 0.05). There was no difference in SBS among materials for CG and ZP, higher SBS were recorded for Ti SB and Ti SB-LC compared to ZO upon the same surface treatments. For the comparisons among treatments, SB-LC showed the highest SBS for CoCr. For ZO and Ti, higher SBS were recorded with SB and SB-LC. No cohesive failures were observed. It was concluded that the surface treatment with 10-MDP-based materials increased the bond strength of the resin cement to abutment materials, which showed to be material dependent. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Polymeric Materials for Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstructive Treatment)

12 pages, 4397 KiB

Open AccessCommunication

Stress Distribution Pattern in Zygomatic Implants Supporting Different Superstructure Materials

by Artak Heboyan, Roberto Lo Giudice, Les Kalman, Muhammad Sohail Zafar and João Paulo Mendes Tribst

Materials 2022, 15(14), 4953; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15144953 - 16 Jul 2022

Cited by 14 | Viewed by 2211

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess and compare the stress–strain pattern of zygomatic dental implants supporting different superstructures using 3D finite element analysis (FEA). A model of a tridimensional edentulous maxilla with four dental implants was designed using the computer-aided design (CAD) software. Two standard and two zygomatic implants were positioned to support the U-shaped bar superstructure. In the computer-aided engineering (CAE) software, different materials have been simulated for the superstructure: cobalt–chrome (CoCr) alloy, titanium alloy (Ti), zirconia (Zr), carbon-fiber polymers (CF) and polyetheretherketone (PEEK). An axial load of 500 N was applied in the posterior regions near the zygomatic implants. Considering the mechanical response of the bone tissue, all superstructure materials resulted in homogeneous strain and thus could reconstruct the edentulous maxilla. However, with the aim to reduce the stress in the zygomatic implants and prosthetic screws, stiffer materials, such Zr, CoCr and Ti, appeared to be a preferable option. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Polymeric Materials for Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstructive Treatment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 5469 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Comparative Evaluation of Tensile Bond Strength of Poly Ether Ether Ketone (PEEK) and Zirconia Copings Using Resin Cement with or without Adhesive: An In Vitro Study

by Nimisha Kakkad, Naveen S. Yadav, Puja Hazari, Shweta Narwani, Kirti Somkuwar, Sakeenabi Basha, Varsha Verma, Suraj Arora, Omir Aldowah, Artak Heboyan and Mohmed Isaqali Karobari

Materials 2022, 15(12), 4167; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15124167 - 12 Jun 2022

Cited by 11 | Viewed by 1722

Abstract

This in vitro research aimed to evaluate the Tensile Bond Strength of Poly Ether Ether Ketone and Zirconia copings using resin cement with or without Visio.link adhesive. From commercially available Zirconia and PEEK, blocks were machined milled using (CAD)/(CAM) to obtain 20 Zirconia and 20 PEEK copings. These specimens were sandblasted using 110 μm of alumina. The two main groups (20 Zirconia and 20 PEEK copings) were divided further into 4 subgroups, GROUP 1 (n = 10) PEEK substructure with self-adhesive resin cement without pretreatment, and GROUP 2 (n = 10) PEEK substructure with self-adhesive resin cement pre-treated with Visio.link adhesive. GROUP 3 (n = 10) Zirconia copings with self-adhesive resin cement without pretreatment. GROUP 4 (n = 10) Zirconia copings with self-adhesive resin cement pre-treated with Visio.link adhesive. Universal testing machine was used to evaluate the tensile bond strength of these copings. The results were analyzed using SPSS software Version 25.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). One-way ANOVA and independent t-test were used to compare the mean scores. Statistically significant increase was observed in Tensile Bond Strength of samples when Visio.link adhesive was used. Tensile Bond Strength of PEEK copings and Zirconia copings with Visio.link adhesive is considerably greater than PEEK copings and Zirconia copings without adhesive. The mean Tensile Bond Strength of Zirconia (with or without adhesive) is less as compared to Tensile Bond Strength of PEEK (with or without adhesive), but the difference is not statistically significant. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Polymeric Materials for Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstructive Treatment)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Editorial, Research

13 pages, 1525 KiB

Open AccessReview

Assessment of Conventionally and Digitally Fabricated Complete Dentures: A Comprehensive Review

by Manal Q. Mubaraki, Mohammed M. Al Moaleem, Abdulrahman H. Alzahrani, Mansoor Shariff, Saeed M. Alqahtani, Amit Porwal, Fuad A. Al-Sanabani, Shilpa Bhandi, João Paulo Mendes Tribst, Artak Heboyan and Shankargouda Patil

Materials 2022, 15(11), 3868; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15113868 - 28 May 2022

Cited by 26 | Viewed by 6570

Abstract

CAD/CAM technology is gaining popularity and replacing archaic conventional procedures for fabricating dentures. CAD/CAM supports using a digital workflow reduce the number of visits, chair time, and laboratory time, making it attractive to patients. This study aimed to provide a comparative review of complete dentures manufactured using CAD/CAM and conventional methods. The PubMed/Medline, Science Direct, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases were searched for studies published in English within the last 11 years (from 2011 to 2021). The keywords used were “computer-engineered complete dentures”, “CAD/CAM complete dentures”, “computer-aided engineering complete dentures”, and “digital complete dentures”. The search yielded 102 articles. Eighteen relevant articles were included in this review. Overall, computer-engineered complete dentures have several advantages over conventional dentures. Patients reported greater satisfaction with computer-engineered complete dentures (CECDs) due to better fit, reduced chair time, shorter appointments, and fewer post-insertion visits. CAD/CAM allows for precision and reproducibility with fewer procedures compared to conventional dentures. Polymethyl methacrylate is used as the denture base material for conventional dentures. For CECDs, the resin can be modified and cross-linked to improve its mechanical properties. The advantages of CECDs include a reduced number of appointments, saving chairside time, a digital workflow allowing easy reproducibility and greater patient satisfaction with a better fit. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Polymeric Materials for Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstructive Treatment)

► Show Figures

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Polymeric Materials for Oral and Maxillofacial Reconstructive Treatment

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Published Papers (7 papers)

Editorial

Research

Review

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI