Browsing by Author "Ozcelik, T. B."

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Digital Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of Four Different Implant Impression Techniques
    (2018) Ozcelik, T. B.; Ozcan, I.; Ozan, O.; 0000-0002-0119-1369; 30297554
    Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the dimensional accuracy of four different implant impression techniques of a mandibular edentulous model with five parallel implants. Materials and Methods: Five dental implants were placed in an edentulous mandibular model in parallel. A total of forty impressions were obtained using four different impression techniques. In Group 1 (G1) and Group 2 (G2), closed tray impressions with and without plastic caps, respectively, were used. In Group 3 (G3) and Group 4 (G4), open tray impressions with a direct splinted technique and an improved direct splinted technique, respectively, were used. All the impressions were poured with Type IV dental stone. Master model and study casts were scanned with a laser optical scanner and aligned by observing the superpositions of the anatomical landmarks using a software program. Statistical Analysis Used: Fifty measurements of the apical, coronal, and angular discrepancies of the master and study casts were obtained (n = 50) and statistically analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance and post hoc (least significant difference) and Friedman's tests. Results: The lowest accuracy was obtained from G2 when the angular (1.48 degrees), coronal (0.32 mu m), and apical (0.14 mu m) deviations were tested (P < 0.05), whereas no statistically significant differences were found among the other groups (P < 0.05). Conclusions: In cases with five parallel mandibular implants, improved accuracy was achieved using the direct splinted technique, the improved direct splinted technique, or the closed tray impression technique with snap on plastic caps.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Survival of Root Canal-Treated Teeth Adjacent to An Implant: A Retrospective Case-Control Study
    (2023) Sisli, S. N.; Gul Ates, E.; Ozcelik, T. B.; Yilmaz, B.; Revilla Leon, M.; 0000-0001-5685-4409; 0000-0002-6166-2601; 37839623; JJF-5618-2023
    Objectives: To evaluate the survival of root canal treated (RCT) teeth adjacent to an implant compared with that of RCT teeth of the same patient non-adjacent to an implant.Materials and methods: RCT tooth of each patient adjacent to an implant were included in the test group. The control group consisted of another RCT tooth of the same patient; the control RCT tooth was not adjacent to an implant and selected to be of the same type of the RCT tooth in the test group. 72 teeth of 36 patients with at least 4-year follow-up were included. In addition to survival, other clinical and demographic parameters investigated were age, sex, tooth type and position, presence of a crown, presence of retreatment, presence of a post-core, presence of adjacent edentulous area, presence of implant-supported fixed prosthetic restoration on the antagonist tooth and periapical health status. Pearson Chi-Square and Fisher Exact tests were used to compare the test and the control groups with categorical variables (alpha=0.05). Survival curves were obtained by the Kaplan-Meier method, and the Log-rank test was performed to compare the survival probabilities (alpha=0.05).Results: No significant difference in survival rates was observed between the test and the control groups (p = 0.72). Similarly, no significant relationship was found between the investigated clinical variables and the survival rates of RCT teeth (p>0.05). Survival times differed depending on the presence of an adjacent edentulous area (p<0.001) and the periapical health status (p = 0.026).Conclusions: RCT teeth with unhealed periapical tissues had a shorter cumulative survival time. Similarly, those adjacent to an edentulous area had shorter cumulative and complication-free survival times.Clinical Significance: This is the first study to determine the survival outcome of a RCT tooth adjacent to an implant compared to a non-adjacent one in the same patient. Being adjacent to an implant did not have a detrimental effect on the survival time and rate of RCT teeth.