-
European Journal of Orthodontics Aug 2016The development of 3D technology and the trend of increasing the use of intraoral scanners in dental office routine lead to the need for comparisons with conventional... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
BACKGROUND
The development of 3D technology and the trend of increasing the use of intraoral scanners in dental office routine lead to the need for comparisons with conventional techniques.
OBJECTIVE
To determine if intra- and inter-arch measurements from digital dental models acquired by an intraoral scanner are as reliable and valid as the similar measurements achieved from dental models obtained through conventional intraoral impressions.
SEARCH METHODS
An unrestricted electronic search of seven databases until February 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Studies that focused on the accuracy and reliability of images obtained from intraoral scanners compared to images obtained from conventional impressions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
After study selection the QUADAS risk of bias assessment tool for diagnostic studies was used to assess the risk of bias (RoB) among the included studies.
RESULTS
Four articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. The scanners evaluated were OrthoProof, Lava, iOC intraoral, Lava COS, iTero and D250. These studies evaluated the reliability of tooth widths, Bolton ratio measurements, and image superimposition. Two studies were classified as having low RoB; one had moderate RoB and the remaining one had high RoB. Only one study evaluated the time required to complete clinical procedures and patient's opinion about the procedure. Patients reported feeling more comfortable with the conventional dental impression method.
LIMITATIONS
Associated costs were not considered in any of the included study.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Inter- and intra-arch measurements from digital models produced from intraoral scans appeared to be reliable and accurate in comparison to those from conventional impressions. This assessment only applies to the intraoral scanners models considered in the finally included studies. Digital models produced by intraoral scan eliminate the need of impressions materials; however, currently, longer time is needed to take the digital images.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO (CRD42014009702).
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Calcium Sulfate; Dental Arch; Dental Impression Technique; Dental Occlusion; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Models, Dental; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 27266879
DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjw033 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Oct 2018This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess and compare the accuracy of conventional and digital implant impressions. The review was registered on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess and compare the accuracy of conventional and digital implant impressions. The review was registered on the PROSPERO register (registration number: CRD42016050730).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic literature search was conducted adhering to PRISMA guidelines to identify studies on implant impressions published between 2012 and 2017. Experimental and clinical studies at all levels of evidence published in peer-reviewed journals were included, excluding expert opinions. Data extraction was performed along defined parameters for studied specimens, digital and conventional impression specifications and outcome assessment.
RESULTS
Seventy-nine studies were included for the systematic review, thereof 77 experimental studies, one RCT and one retrospective study. The study setting was in vitro for most of the included studies (75 studies) and in vivo for four studies. Accuracy of conventional impressions was examined in 59 studies, whereas digital impressions were examined in 11 studies. Nine studies compared the accuracy of conventional and digital implant impressions. Reported measurements for the accuracy include the following: (a) linear and angular deviations between reference models and test models fabricated with each impression technique; (b) three-dimensional deviations between impression posts and scan bodies respectively; and (c) fit of implant-supported frameworks, assessed by measuring marginal discrepancy along implant abutments.) Meta-analysis was performed of 62 studies. The results of conventional and digital implant impressions exhibited high values for heterogeneity.
CONCLUSIONS
The available data for accuracy of digital and conventional implant impressions have a low evidence level and do not include sufficient data on in vivo application to derive clinical recommendations.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Databases, Factual; Dental Implantation; Dental Implants; Dental Impression Materials; Dental Impression Technique; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Humans; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Models, Dental; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30328182
DOI: 10.1111/clr.13273 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Sep 2016In existing published reports, some studies indicate the superiority of digital impression systems in terms of the marginal accuracy of ceramic restorations, whereas... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Evaluation of the marginal fit of single-unit, complete-coverage ceramic restorations fabricated after digital and conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
In existing published reports, some studies indicate the superiority of digital impression systems in terms of the marginal accuracy of ceramic restorations, whereas others show that the conventional method provides restorations with better marginal fit than fully digital fabrication. Which impression method provides the lowest mean values for marginal adaptation is inconclusive. The findings from those studies cannot be easily generalized, and in vivo studies that could provide valid and meaningful information are limited in the existing publications.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to systematically review existing reports and evaluate the marginal fit of ceramic single-tooth restorations after either digital or conventional impression methods by combining the available evidence in a meta-analysis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The search strategy for this systematic review of the publications was based on a Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) framework. For the statistical analysis, the mean marginal fit values of each study were extracted and categorized according to the impression method to calculate the mean value, together with the 95% confidence intervals (CI) of each category, and to evaluate the impact of each impression method on the marginal adaptation by comparing digital and conventional techniques separately for in vitro and in vivo studies.
RESULTS
Twelve studies were included in the meta-analysis from the 63 identified records after database searching. For the in vitro studies, where ceramic restorations were fabricated after conventional impressions, the mean value of the marginal fit was 58.9 μm (95% CI: 41.1-76.7 μm), whereas after digital impressions, it was 63.3 μm (95% CI: 50.5-76.0 μm). In the in vivo studies, the mean marginal discrepancy of the restorations after digital impressions was 56.1 μm (95% CI: 46.3-65.8 μm), whereas after conventional impressions, it was 79.2 μm (95% CI: 59.6-98.9 μm)
CONCLUSION
No significant difference was observed regarding the marginal discrepancy of single-unit ceramic restorations fabricated after digital or conventional impressions.
Topics: Ceramics; Computer-Aided Design; Dental Impression Technique; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Humans
PubMed: 27061627
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.028 -
Materials (Basel, Switzerland) Apr 2020The advent of new technologies in the field of medicine and dentistry is giving improvements that lead the clinicians to have materials and procedures able to improve... (Review)
Review
The advent of new technologies in the field of medicine and dentistry is giving improvements that lead the clinicians to have materials and procedures able to improve patients' quality of life. In dentistry, the last digital techniques offer a fully digital computerized workflow that does not include the standard multiple traditional phases. The purpose of this study is to evaluate all clinical trials and clinical randomized trials related to the digital or dental impression technique in prosthetic dentistry trying to give the readers global information about advantages and disadvantages of each procedure. Data collection was conducted in the main scientific search engines, including articles from the last 10 years, in order to obtain results that do not concern obsolete impression techniques. Elsevier, Pubmed and Embase have been screened as sources for performing the research. The results data demonstrated how the working time appears to be improved with digital workflow, but without a significant result (P = 0.72596). The papers have been selected following the Population Intervention Comparison Outcome (PICO) question, which is related to the progress on dental impression materials and technique. The comparison between dentists or practitioners with respect to classic impression procedures, and students open to new device and digital techniques seem to be the key factor on the final impression technique choice. Surely, digital techniques will end up supplanting the analogical ones altogether, improving the quality of oral rehabilitations, the economics of dental practice and also the perception by our patients.
PubMed: 32340384
DOI: 10.3390/ma13081982 -
The International Journal of... 2019To systematically review the available literature and determine the potential benefits of altered cast impression technique over conventional single-impression...
PURPOSE
To systematically review the available literature and determine the potential benefits of altered cast impression technique over conventional single-impression techniques for the fabrication of distal extension removable dental prostheses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The indexed English literature published up to April 30, 2018, was systematically searched for studies comparing altered cast impression technique to conventional single-impression techniques for the fabrication of distal extension removable dental prostheses using guidelines recommended by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA). The databases searched were PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE (OVID). Two reviewers independently screened and shortlisted the relevant studies based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria.
RESULTS
Seven studies were included in this review; all were in vivo studies. All seven studies reported that cast removable partial dentures fabricated with altered cast impression technique displayed less vertical movement of denture bases compared to those fabricated using conventional impression techniques. Two of these studies reported that this difference in vertical movement was clinically insignificant, while the other five studies reported a statistically significant difference in vertical movement but were uncertain regarding clinical significance.
CONCLUSION
The results of this literature review indicate that the altered cast impression technique did not offer significant advantages over conventional single-impression techniques. The lack of convincing data to predict superiority of the altered cast impression technique for distal extension removable dental prosthesis impressions emphasizes the need for more scientific research with larger sample sizes and longer performance reviews of removable dental prostheses.
Topics: Dental Impression Technique; Denture Bases; Denture, Partial, Removable
PubMed: 31034543
DOI: 10.11607/ijp.6198 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Jul 2022A consensus on the accuracy of additively manufactured casts in comparison with those fabricated by using conventional techniques for fixed dental prostheses is lacking. (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
A consensus on the accuracy of additively manufactured casts in comparison with those fabricated by using conventional techniques for fixed dental prostheses is lacking.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the accuracy of additively manufactured casts for tooth- or implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in comparison with that of gypsum casts.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (CDR42020161006). Eight databases were searched in December 2019 and updated in September 2020. Studies evaluating the dimensional accuracy of additively manufactured casts for fixed dental prostheses in comparison with that of gypsum casts were included. An adapted checklist for reporting in vitro studies (Checklist for Reporting In vitro Studies guidelines) was used to assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS
Eight studies evaluating tooth-supported fixed dental prosthesis casts and 7 studies evaluating implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis casts were eligible for this review. Gypsum casts showed greater accuracy (trueness and precision) in most studies, although additively manufactured casts also yielded highly precise data. One study was associated with a low risk of bias, 9 with a moderate risk of bias, and 5 with a high risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
In vitro studies showed that additively manufactured casts and gypsum casts share similar accuracy within the acceptable range for the fabrication of casts. The quality of scanned data, additive manufacture technology, printing settings, and postprocessing procedures plays an essential role in the accuracy of additively manufactured casts. Clinical studies are required to confirm these findings.
Topics: Calcium Sulfate; Computer-Aided Design; Dental Impression Technique; Humans; Printing, Three-Dimensional; Prosthodontics; Workflow
PubMed: 33551140
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.12.008 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Nov 2022Evidence comparing the marginal and internal fit of single metal copings fabricated via selective laser sintering and conventional lost-wax casting is inadequate. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Evidence comparing the marginal and internal fit of single metal copings fabricated via selective laser sintering and conventional lost-wax casting is inadequate.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the fit of single metal copings fabricated via selective laser sintering and lost-wax casting. Moreover, the effects of different variables on fit accuracy were determined.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, and Wiley databases were searched electronically as well as manually. The mean absolute marginal gap, marginal gap, internal gap, axial gap, and occlusal gap values of single metal copings fabricated via selective laser sintering and lost-wax casting were statistically analyzed to determine and evaluate the factors affecting the fit accuracy (α=.05).
RESULTS
Single metal copings fabricated via selective laser sintering had mean absolute marginal gaps and occlusal gaps similar to those of copings fabricated via lost-wax casting, based on a subgroup meta-analysis of gaps evaluated using stereomicroscopy (P>.05). The fit of single metal copings was not affected by the type of tooth (P>.05). The conventional impression, the indirect digital scan, and the direct digital scan led to similar values of mean axial gap, internal gap, and marginal gap for the copings fabricated via lost-wax casting (P>.05). The indirect and direct digital scans led to similar values of mean axial gap, internal gap, and marginal gap for the copings fabricated via selective laser sintering (P>.05). Printed wax patterns provided significantly smaller mean axial gap values than milled plastic or milled wax patterns for the copings fabricated via lost-wax casting (P<.05). Printed, milled, and conventional wax patterns had similar mean marginal gaps and internal gaps for the copings fabricated via lost-wax casting (P>.05). For single copings fabricated via lost-wax casting, Ni-Cr and Co-Cr had similar mean internal gaps (P>.05).
CONCLUSIONS
No statistically significant differences were found between single metal copings fabricated via selective laser sintering and lost-wax casting. Selective laser sintering can satisfy the clinical requirement for single metal copings.
Topics: Dental Marginal Adaptation; Dental Casting Technique; Dental Prosthesis Design; Computer-Aided Design; Chromium Alloys; Lasers; Crowns
PubMed: 33789799
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.02.011 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Jan 2022Intraoral scanners have significantly improved over the last decade. Nevertheless, data comparing intraoral digital scans with conventional impressions are sparse. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparative assessment of complete-coverage, fixed tooth-supported prostheses fabricated from digital scans or conventional impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Intraoral scanners have significantly improved over the last decade. Nevertheless, data comparing intraoral digital scans with conventional impressions are sparse.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the impact of impression technique (digital scans versus conventional impressions) on the clinical time, patient comfort, and marginal fit of tooth-supported prostheses.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The authors conducted a literature search based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) framework in 3 databases to identify clinical trials with no language or date restrictions. The mean clinical time, patient comfort, and marginal fit values of each study were independently extracted by 2 review authors and categorized according to the scanning or impression method. The authors assessed the study-level risk of bias.
RESULTS
A total of 16 clinical studies met the inclusion criteria. The mean clinical time was statistically similar for digital scan procedures (784 ±252 seconds) and for conventional impression methods (1125 ±159 seconds) (P>.05). The digital scan techniques were more comfortable for patients than conventional impressions; the mean visual analog scale score was 67.8 ±21.7 for digital scans and 39.6 ±9.3 for conventional impressions (P<.05). The mean marginal fit was 80.9 ±31.9 μm and 92.1 ±35.4 μm for digital scan and conventional impressions, respectively, with no statistically significant difference (P>.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Digital scan techniques are comparable with conventional impressions in terms of clinical time and marginal fit but are more comfortable for patients than conventional impression techniques.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Databases, Factual; Dental Impression Materials; Dental Impression Technique; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Dental Prosthesis Design; Humans
PubMed: 33143901
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.09.017 -
Cureus Jan 2024The accuracy of definitive impressions has a significant impact on the quality of the final prosthesis. Elastic impression materials are commonly used in the traditional... (Review)
Review
The accuracy of definitive impressions has a significant impact on the quality of the final prosthesis. Elastic impression materials are commonly used in the traditional approach to replicate anatomical structures while indirectly fabricating prostheses. Digital impression has gained increasing popularity due to its various advantages, including three-dimensional previsualization, cost-effectiveness, and reduced time consumption. The objective of this study is to evaluate existing studies to provide an overview of the comparative advantages of digital impression techniques over conventional techniques. The review will focus on evaluating the accuracy, patient acceptability, operator preference, and time effectiveness of digital impression techniques in comparison to conventional techniques. The Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome framework served as the basis for this study's search strategy. We conducted a comprehensive literature review by electronically searching articles published between 2000 and 2023 in PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, and the Web of Science. Furthermore, additional manual searches were conducted. The study examined the differences between optical impressions and traditional impressions in terms of accuracy, patient outcomes, and operator outcomes. It included both clinical and preclinical studies as well as randomized controlled trials. In conclusion, this review provides a short summary indicating that digital impressions exhibit comparable accuracy to conventional impressions without any statistically significant difference. This conclusion is based on an evaluation of accuracy, patient preference, and operator preference.
PubMed: 38304652
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.51537 -
BMC Oral Health Jul 2023Polyvinyl ether siloxane (PVES) possesses ideal characteristics for making precise and accurate dental impressions. PVES dimensional stability owes to its better... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Polyvinyl ether siloxane (PVES) possesses ideal characteristics for making precise and accurate dental impressions. PVES dimensional stability owes to its better polymeric properties derived from its parent materials poly ethers and polyvinyl siloxanes. As recommended use of chemical disinfecting agents is getting more popular, there is a growing concern associated with the effect of disinfectants on PVES dimensional stability. This study was aimed to understand the PVES behavior when subjected to chemical disinfectants.
MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY
The data was collected from research studies retrieved from Google Scholar, Scopus, and PubMed using MeSH terms of keywords "vinyl polyether siloxane AND Disinfection" or (Vinyl polyether siloxane OR polyvinyl siloxane ether OR PVES) AND (disinfectant OR disinfection)" without any restriction to publication date. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis) directions were observed during the data collection, screening of studies, and meta-analysis. The primary data were retrieved, and batch exported from databases using Harzing's Publish or Perish software; primary analysis was performed in Microsoft Excel, while statistical analysis for effect size, two-tailed p-values, and heterogeneity among studies was performed using Meta Essentials. The effect size was calculated using Hedge's g values at the 95% confidence level using the random-effects model. Heterogeneity among studies was measured using the Cochrane Q and I.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
Dental impressions made from the PVES elastomeric impression materials showed no significant changes in dimensional stability. Immersion in the chemical disinfectant for 10 min was associated with clinically irrelevant changes in the dimensions of the PVES impressions. Disinfection with sodium hypochlorite was associated with clinically significant changes in dimensions, with a two-tailed p-value of 0.049. Disinfection with 2-2.5% glutaraldehyde solution was not associated with any significant dimensional variability.
Topics: Humans; Disinfectants; Disinfection; Ether; Ethers; Ethyl Ethers; Polyvinyls; Siloxanes
PubMed: 37430254
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03168-8