Mathematical modelling and numerical simulation of adsorption processes at microdisk electrodes

A general mathematical model for electrosorption under planar and microdisk diffusion conditions has been developed and solved using numerical simulation. This model allowed us to explore the electrochemical behaviour of such systems and to highlight some of their main properties.     

Simulation of square-wave voltammetry at a channel electrode: E,EC and ECE processes

A simulation is developed for square-wave voltammetry occurring at a channel electrode. The technique is based on the space marching variation of the backward implicit method and facilitates the study of E, EC and ECE mechanistic schemes. Further, the investigation of the effects of the rate of mass transport on the three key voltammetric properties — peak current, peak position and peak width at half-height — is possible and the results are compared with previously published work where a stagnant Nernstian diffusion layer was used as a general approximation to all hydrodynamic electrodes.     

Use of dynamically adaptive grid techniques for the solution of electrochemical kinetic equations: Part 6. Testing of the finite-difference patch-adaptive strategy on example models with solution difficulties at the electrodes,in one-dimensional space geometry

The patch-adaptive strategy described in Part 5 proves to provide correct, fairly efficient, and nearly automatic solutions to six representative example electrochemical kinetic models in one-dimensional space geometry, that exhibit difficult-to-resolve local spatial and temporal solution structures at the electrodes. The models describe: the square-wave controlled potential transient for an uncomplicated heterogeneous charge transfer reaction, the potential step method and linear potential sweep voltammetry for the standard catalytic reaction mechanism with a pseudo-first-order homogeneous reaction, linear potential sweep voltammetry for an EC reaction mechanism involving a follow-up homogeneous dimerisation, steady-state voltammetry at a rotating disc electrode, and steady-state voltammetry at a spherical microelectrode. These examples are characterised by extremely thin reaction layers and other instances of local spatial regions of considerable variations of the solution, including transient effects caused by temporal discontinuities of boundary conditions. The strategy creates dynamically spatio-temporal grids well adapted to such solution structures, without any a priori knowledge about their location. The accuracy of the numerical solutions proves well controlled by means of error tolerance parameters. Numerical difficulties observed with the previously described adaptive moving grid technique do not occur in the present strategy. However, further work is needed to improve the performance of the strategy in the cases of thin reaction layers associated with fast second-order homogeneous reactions, and boundary layers associated with hydrodynamic electroanalytical methods, for which the computational effort appears too large.     

Five-year evaluation of implants placed at extraction and with dehiscences and fenestration defects augmented with ePTFE membranes: results from a prospective multicenter study

Background: Barrier membranes have been used to promote bone ingrowth on implants with dehiscences and fenestrations. Membranes also have been used to protect defects adjacent to implants placed at the time of extraction. The concept of guided bone regeneration relates to preferentially allowing cells from bone to migrate into various defects while excluding fibrous tissue and epithelium. The purpose of these procedures is to enhance bone-to-implant contact at the treated sites and to prevent mucosal complications. Purpose: The purpose of this article is to report clinical outcomes for implants placed at the time of extraction and augmented with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) and followed for 5 years. The outcomes for implants with dehiscences and fenestrations augmented with ePTFE barriers and followed up to 5 years also are reported. Methods and Materials: Four treatment centers participated in this study (Tucson, Gothenburg, Spokane, and Leuven). In the extraction group, teeth were removed for varying reasons, and Brånemark implants were placed and stabilized within the host bone. Defects present at the coronal implant aspect were covered with ePTFE barrier membranes. Flaps were rotated to cover the membrane-treated sites. If exposure of the material occurred prior to second-stage surgery, the membranes were removed. Barriers remaining unexposed were removed at second-stage surgery. The implants were followed up to 5 years. In the fenestration and dehiscence group, implants with exposed threads were augmented with ePTFE barrier membranes. The barriers were removed at appropriate intervals, and the patients were followed up to 5 years. Radiographic measurements were made from nonstandardized periapical radiographs at abutment connection and 1, 3, and 5-year follow-up visits. Results: Forty patients participated in the extraction group. They received a total of 49 implants. Three implants failed prior to loading. The 5-year cumulative survival rates for implants placed at the time of extraction were 93.9% and 93.8%, respectively, for maxillary and mandibular implants. The average maxillary mesial and distal marginal bone loss (1–5 yr) was 0.3 mm (standard deviation [SD] = 1.5) and 0.3 mm (SD = 1.0). In mandibles, the average mesial and distal bone loss (1–5 yr) was -0.2 mm (SD = 0.5) and -0.05 mm (SD = 0.6), respectively. The dehiscence and fenestration group included 44 patients. Twenty-six were followed for up to 5 years. Eight patients experienced total implant failure. For dehiscences and fenestrations, the cumulative survival rates were 76.8% and 83.8% for maxillary and mandibular implants, respectively. The average maxillary mesial and distal bone loss (1–5 yr) was 0.4 mm (SD = 0.8) and 0.2 mm (SD = 0.9), respectively. In mandibles, the average mesial and distal marginal bone loss was 0.3 mm (SD = 0.9) and 0.3 mm (SD = 0.8), respectively. Conclusions: Implants placed at the time of extraction and augmented with ePTFE barrier membranes have favorable long-term predictability. On the other hand, long-term evaluation of implant dehiscences and fenestrations augmented with barrier membranes indicates that they have less favorable 5-year survival rates. Membrane augmentation of these may be questioned.     

Effects of prosthetic treatment for shortened dental arches on oral health-related quality of life, self-reports of pain and jaw disability: results from the pilot-phase of a randomized multicentre trial

A multi-centre randomized clinical trial is under way at 14 university dental schools in Germany to compare prosthodontic treatments for the shortened dental arch (SDA). One of the aims of this pilot-study was to measure the effect of two treatment options of the SDA on oral health-related quality of life and on the Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) for temporomandibular disorders (TMD). Thirty-four patients participated in the pilot-study. Inclusion criteria were: all molars were missing and the presence of at least both canines and one premolar in each quadrant. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either removable partial dentures including molar replacement (RPD_group) or retain a premolar occlusion (PROC_group). The Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-49) and the RDC for TMD were completed by participants before treatment (pre-treatment), 6 weeks (6 wks), 6 months (6m) and 12 months (12 m) after treatment. At the 12-month follow up, data of 10 women and 11 men (mean age: 62 +/- 10 years) were available. Medians of the OHIP total-scores were as follows: RPD (n = 10), 43.5 (pre-treatment), 18.2 (6 wks), 13.3 (6m), 14.7 (12 m). PROC (n = 11): 31.8 (pre-treatment), 27.1 (6 wks), 8.8 (6m), 8.3 (12 m). Significant differences were shown for RPD_group between pre-treatment and 6m/12 m and for PROC_group between pre-treatment and 6m. There were no significant differences between treatment groups at any time. Within each group, an improvement of life-quality was observed. No significant difference could be reported between the two therapy concepts. This may be due to the low sample size within the pilot study.