The difference of the mock-up compared to the wax-up was quantified using morphologic operations. The results were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn post hoc test (P < .05). All mock-ups were larger in size in comparison to the wax-up. Significant differences were found for every labial surface third. The incisal third was the most inaccurate third, while the middle third was the most accurate. The most accurate groups were 2 and 5, and the largest discrepancy was observed in group 6. The analog mock-up differed dimensionally from the wax-up, irrespective of the technique/materials used.The analog mock-up differed dimensionally from the wax-up, irrespective of the technique/materials used. To compare the marginal fit and internal surface roughness of CAD/CAM zirconia copings milled with 3- and 5-axis milling devices. Forty titanium implant stock abutments (4.8 mm in diameter, 4 mm in height) screwed to dental implants (4.1 mm in diameter) embedded in resin were considered phantoms and included in this in vitro study. All 40 phantoms were scanned with the same intraoral scanner, from which images of the virtual wax-up of zirconia copings were obtained and exported as standard tessellation language (STL) files. Selleckchem Chlorin e6 From each resulting STL file, two copings were milled one using a 3-axis milling device, and the other using a 5-axis milling device. After milling, zirconia copings underwent high-speed sintering before being analyzed for marginal fit (ie, marginal gap measurement), and internal surface roughness was assessed with a scanning electron microscope (SEM). Statistical comparisons between groups were assessed with Mann-Whitney test. Median marginal gap values were 34.80 μm (95% CI 0.00 to 173.98) for the 5-axis milling device group and 141.97 μm (95% CI 82.13 to 163.46) for the 3-axis milling device group. A statistically significant difference in marginal gap was found between both milling device groups (P = .039). In addition, qualitative SEM analysis indicated higher internal surface roughness for the 3-axis milling device group. Within the limitations of this study, the present findings suggest that 5-axis milling devices outperform 3-axis milling devices for milling CAD/CAM zirconia copings from intraoral scans of implant stock abutments.Within the limitations of this study, the present findings suggest that 5-axis milling devices outperform 3-axis milling devices for milling CAD/CAM zirconia copings from intraoral scans of implant stock abutments. To investigate the relationships among occlusion time, disclusion time, occlusal load distributions, and simultaneous electromyographic (EMG) recordings of the anterior temporalis (TA) and masseter (MM) muscles during centric and lateral movements in patients with unilateral temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain and in asymptomatic control subjects. Twelve healthy and 13 unilateral TMD subjects participated in the present study. The diagnosis of unilateral TMD was verified with vibrational analysis of the temporomandibular joints (TMJs) using the BioJVA (BioResearch Associates). Simultaneous computerized digital occlusal analysis using T-Scan III (Tekscan) and EMG activity of the MM and TA muscles using BioEMG III (BioResearch Associates) were performed in the intercuspal position and in right and left excursive movements. In intercuspal and lateral movement records, EMG activity of the masticatory muscles, occlusion time, disclusion time, and bite force distribution ratios were evaluated. No statisticaver, in lateral movements, the painful side of the unilateral TMD patients revealed increased balancing side TA activity, with higher disclusion time and balancing side force distribution.In the intercuspal position, there was no difference in occlusion time, distribution of force, or EMG activity of the masticatory muscles observed between the control group and unilateral TMD pain patients. However, in lateral movements, the painful side of the unilateral TMD patients revealed increased balancing side TA activity, with higher disclusion time and balancing side force distribution. To evaluate whether a concordance assessment (CA) software application is able to assess decision-making in restorative and prosthetic dentistry. Vignettes representing 10 different clinical situations were integrated into a software application. Each vignette included 3D digital models and a short case, as well as 5 therapeutic options rated on a 4-point Likert scale (-2 = strongly contraindicated; -1 = contraindicated; +1 = indicated; +2 = strongly indicated). A panel of 15 dental educators (9 educators from the prosthetic department [PD] and 6 from the conservative department [CD]) had to evaluate the indication of each of the 5 therapies for the 10 vignettes. This pilot questionnaire showed good internal consistency on most therapies (Cronbach's α = 0.86), with the exception of more recently introduced therapies (overlay/veneerlay and endocrown). On a maximum score out of 100, the average of CD educators (79.2 ± 3.2) was not significantly different (P = .73) from that of a PD educator (77.8 ± 3.5). Scores ranged from 66.8 to 89.6. Analysis of the expert panel's responses also reported mostly (34/50) a distribution of responses that was characteristic of CA and uncertain situations. The present software application was able to reproduce and assess decision-making in dentistry with satisfying internal consistency of educators.The present software application was able to reproduce and assess decision-making in dentistry with satisfying internal consistency of educators. To compare in a randomized controlled trial the 5-year clinical outcomes of (1) 3-unit fiber-reinforced resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses (RBFDPs) to 3-unit metal-ceramic RBFDPs; and (2) 3-unit fiber-reinforced RBFDPs to 2-unit cantilevered metal-ceramic RBFDPs. A consecutive sample of 50 young adult patients with tooth agenesis or trauma in the anterior region was included. The recruitment period was from 2005 to 2009, during which a total of 62 RBFDPs were inserted. In group A, 27 participants were randomly treated with 18 metal-ceramic 3-unit RBFDPs and 15 3-unit fiber-reinforced RBFDPs. In group B, 23 participants were randomly treated with 16 metal-ceramic 2-unit RBFDPs and 13 3-unit fiber-reinforced RBFDPs. All patients were followed up at baseline registration and at 1, 3, and 5 years. The primary outcome parameter was survival rate of the RBFDPs, and the secondary outcome parameters were periodontal and technical/esthetic outcomes and patient-reported evaluation of the RBFDPs. Seven patients dropped out of the study during the 5-year observation period.