<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Proton Dental Design]]></title><description><![CDATA[Proton Dental Design]]></description><link>https://www.protondentaldesign.ca/blog</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2026 16:59:23 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://www.protondentaldesign.ca/blog-feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title><![CDATA[Screw Fracture Overview]]></title><description><![CDATA[Problem &#38; Impact: Fractured implant screws, while uncommon, pose a significant mechanical complication. They often follow screw loosening or biomechanical overload, sometimes leading to complex retrieval or even implant removal. Main Causes: Fatigue fracture from repeated micro-movements, inadequate preload or torque, prosthetic misfit, excessive occlusal loading, parafunctional habits, and suboptimal screw design or materials are leading contributors. Materials/Fractography: Recent analyses...]]></description><link>https://www.protondentaldesign.ca/post/screw-fracture-overview</link><guid isPermaLink="false">6a32f38273364b8eee6d1d2c</guid><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 19:20:36 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>Karla Zepeda Ulloa</dc:creator></item><item><title><![CDATA[Zirconia Vs E.Max]]></title><description><![CDATA[ZIRCONIA — Strength &#38; Durability First Pros: • High flexural strength → ideal for posterior load, bruxers, thin restorations. • Excellent fracture resistance. • Minimal reduction needed. Cons: • Very high radiopacity → can mask small recurrent caries, complicate marginal evaluation. • Causes CBCT scatter/beam-hardening → reduced diagnostic accuracy around margins. • Less lifelike translucency than glass-ceramics. E.MAX (LITHIUM DISILICATE) — Esthetics &#38; Adhesion Pros: • Superior translucency...]]></description><link>https://www.protondentaldesign.ca/post/zirconia-vs-e-max</link><guid isPermaLink="false">6a32f312ce85b49c3c4e0819</guid><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 19:18:46 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>Karla Zepeda Ulloa</dc:creator></item><item><title><![CDATA[Sleeveless vs. Metal Sleeve Surgical Guides: What Does the Evidence Really Say? ]]></title><description><![CDATA[As digital workflows evolve, the debate between sleeveless and metal sleeve surgical guides continues, and the findings aren't as clear-cut as you might think. Recent Evidence Supporting Sleeveless: 2025 in vitro study (Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research): Sleeveless guides delivered superior accuracy, milled sleeveless had best linear accuracy, 3D printed sleeveless had best angular accuracy 2024 study (Medicina): Sleeveless 3D-printed guides showed comparable or better...]]></description><link>https://www.protondentaldesign.ca/post/sleeveless-vs-metal-sleeve-surgical-guides-what-does-the-evidence-really-say</link><guid isPermaLink="false">6a32f2749b47a7f91ae6e6af</guid><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 19:17:25 GMT</pubDate><dc:creator>Karla Zepeda Ulloa</dc:creator></item></channel></rss>