-
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 -
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 -
Biomaterial Investigations in Dentistry 2020To compare the fit and assess the accuracy of tooth-supported single and multi-unit FDPs in cobalt chromium fabricated using different manufacturing techniques. A... (Review)
Review
To compare the fit and assess the accuracy of tooth-supported single and multi-unit FDPs in cobalt chromium fabricated using different manufacturing techniques. A systematic search was performed in three databases; PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, using clearly specified search terms and inclusion criteria. The search yielded 1071 articles and included 18 articles in the analysis. Data regarding the fit analyses and the methods of manufacturing were extracted and the accuracy was defined as the fit result minus the pre-set cement spacer. Internal gap (IntG) was the mean of all the internal measuring points and total gap (TotG) was the mean of all measuring points (marginal, cervical, chamfer, axial, occlusal). The total gap results for fit and accuracy irrespective of manufacturing technique were 96 μm and 54 μm for single crowns, 107 μm and 54 μm for multi-unit FDPs, and 98 μm and 54 μm for both single crowns and multi-unit FDPs combined. For total gap of single crowns soft milling had the highest accuracy, for multi-unit FDPs additive manufactured restorations had the highest accuracy. With the results grouped by impression technique, the accuracy for total gap was highest for digital impressions and lower for conventional impressions. Due to the inherent limitations of this systematic review, it still remains unclear what effect the manufacturing technique has on the fit of FDPs. However, the descriptive results suggest that the marginal fit of cobalt chromium FDPs is not negatively affected by the manufacturing technique.
PubMed: 32083253
DOI: 10.1080/26415275.2020.1714445 -
PeerJ 2023To systematically evaluate the disinfection efficacy of the two most frequently used disinfectants, sodium hypochlorite and glutaraldehyde, and their effects on the...
Disinfection efficacy of sodium hypochlorite and glutaraldehyde and their effects on the dimensional stability and surface properties of dental impressions: a systematic review.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically evaluate the disinfection efficacy of the two most frequently used disinfectants, sodium hypochlorite and glutaraldehyde, and their effects on the surface properties of four different dental impression materials.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in four databases until May 1st, 2022 to select the studies which evaluated disinfection efficacy of disinfectants or surface properties of dental impressions after chemical disinfection.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 50 studies were included through electronic database searches. Of these studies, 13 studies evaluated disinfection efficacy of two disinfectants, and 39 studies evaluated their effects on the surface properties of dental impressions. A 10-minute disinfection with 0.5-1% sodium hypochlorite or 2% glutaraldehyde was effective to inactivate oral flora and common oral pathogenic bacteria. With regard to surface properties, chemical disinfection within 30 min could not alter the dimensional stability, detail reproduction and wettability of alginate and polyether impressions. However, the wettability of addition silicone impressions and the dimensional stability of condensation silicone impressions were adversely affected after chemical disinfection, while other surface properties of these two dental impressions were out of significant influence.
CONCLUSIONS
Alginate impressions are strongly recommended to be disinfected with 0.5% sodium hypochlorite using spray disinfection method for 10 min. Meanwhile, elastomeric impressions are strongly recommended to be disinfected with 0.5% sodium hypochlorite or 2% glutaraldehyde using immersion disinfection method for 10 min, however, polyether impression should be disinfected with 2% glutaraldehyde.
Topics: Sodium Hypochlorite; Glutaral; Disinfection; Time Factors; Disinfectants; Surface Properties; Silicones; Alginates; Bacteria
PubMed: 36846444
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14868 -
BMC Oral Health Dec 2023The goal behind this study is to answer the question "In tooth-supported fixed partial dentures (FPDs), does the digital impression techniques compared to fabrications... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The goal behind this study is to answer the question "In tooth-supported fixed partial dentures (FPDs), does the digital impression techniques compared to fabrications using conventional impression methods improve the marginal and internal fit?
BACKGROUND
The incorporation of digital technology in the fabrication of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) has accelerated over the past decade. This study is directed at evaluating the marginal and internal fit of FPDs manufactured using digital approaches compared to conventional techniques. The need for updated data has encouraged this review.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An electronic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Grey Database to identify relevant studies. The Modified Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) was used to assess the risk of bias in in vitro experiments. The key results of this meta-analysis were the standard mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of each main variance, marginal fit, and internal fit between the digital and conventional techniques. Additional analyses were performed to assess the significance of three subgroup parameters: method of digitalization, cement spacer thickness, and span length, and their influence on the fit of the FPDs.
RESULTS
Based on predefined criteria, of the seven articles included in this systematic review, only five were selected for the quantitative data analysis. The marginal fit results were (P = 0.06; SMD: -1.88; 95% CI: - 3.88, 0.11) (P > 0.05) and the internal fit results were (P = 0.02; SMD: -0.80; 95% CI: - 1.49, - 0.10) (P < 0.05). Regarding the subgroup analyses, the method of digitalization subgroup results were (P = 0.35; SMD: -1.89; 95% CI: - 3.89, 0.11) and (P = 0.80; SMD: -0.80; 95% CI: - 1.49, - 0.11) for marginal and internal fit, respectively. The span length results were (P = 0.10; SMD: -1.89; 95% CI: - 3.89, 0.11) for marginal fit and (P = 0.02; SMD: -0.80; 95% CI: - 1.49, - 0.11) for internal fit. The cement spacer thickness (P = 0.01; SMD: -1.89; 95% CI: - 3.89, 0.11) and (P = 0.04; SMD: -0.80; 95% CI: - 1.49, - 0.11) for marginal and internal fit, respectively.
CONCLUSION
Tooth-retained fixed partial dentures FPDs produced by digital scanning and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) systems can significantly enhance the internal fit compared with those manufactured by traditional methods. Intraoral scanners can replace conventional impressions for the fabrication of FPDs because they minimize the operating time and reduce patient pain. Further clinical studies are required to obtain more conclusive results.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42021261397.
Topics: Humans; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Denture, Partial, Fixed; Computer-Aided Design; Research Design; Dental Prosthesis Design
PubMed: 38049754
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03628-1 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Jan 2024Time and cost are factors that influence a patient's decision on dental prosthetic treatment. Evidence is needed to demonstrate that restoration using digital systems is... (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Time and cost are factors that influence a patient's decision on dental prosthetic treatment. Evidence is needed to demonstrate that restoration using digital systems is more rapid and less costly than the conventional process.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to analyze and compare the duration and cost of fixed dental prostheses fabricated using digital and conventional methods from scanning or impression making to delivery of the prosthesis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol (PRISMA-P 2015) guidelines. The analysis methods and inclusion criteria were documented in a protocol registered in the Prospective International Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42023458734). The bibliographic search was carried out using PubMed, Cochrane, and PROSPERO databases. The main keywords used were (Prosthodontic OR restorative dentistry OR denture) AND (CAD CAM OR Digital workflow OR Computer Dentistry OR Digital Design) AND (Economic OR cost OR Financial OR time efficiency). Two investigators undertook the different steps of article selection.
RESULTS
A total of 8 articles published between 2010 and 2023 were found for the qualitative synthesis by using the search criteria. Two studies showed that conventional impressions took more time than digital scans for the fabrication of a single crown, and 1 study showed the opposite. One study found that a digital scan was faster than conventional impression making for the fabrication of a 3-unit fixed partial denture, and another study showed the opposite. The dental laboratory technician spent more time on the conventional workflow than the digital workflow for the 3-unit framework and veneering process. No difference was found between conventional and digital workflows for clinical evaluation and chairside adjustment for the fabrication of a single crown. No articles have compared the cost of fixed prostheses.
CONCLUSIONS
The digital pathway can shorten the laboratory process. However, the duration of the impression or scan may vary depending on the technique used. Studies are needed to analyze the cost-effectiveness of the fabrication of tooth-supported restorations.
PubMed: 38302291
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.01.003 -
International Journal of Implant... May 2024The purpose of this systematic review was to explore and identify the factors that influence the accuracy of intraoral scanning in implant dentistry, with a specific... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to explore and identify the factors that influence the accuracy of intraoral scanning in implant dentistry, with a specific focus on scan bodies (ISBs).
METHODS
Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, this study conducted a thorough electronic search across MedLine, PubMed, and Scopus to identify relevant studies. Articles were screened based on titles, abstracts, and full texts for relevance. The Robins I tool assessed the risk of bias in various study types. Data extraction occurred based on predetermined parameters for studying specimens and assessing outcomes.
RESULTS
16 studies met the specified criteria and were consequently included in the systematic review. Due to variations in variables and methods across the selected studies, statistical comparison of results was not feasible. Therefore, a descriptive review approach was chosen, acknowledging the substantial heterogeneity in the reviewed literature.
CONCLUSIONS
The precision of virtual scan results is contingent upon diverse characteristics of ISBs and implants. These factors encompass their placement within the dental arch, structural design, shape, material composition, color, and the manufacturing system, all of which contribute to scan accuracy. Additionally, considerations such as the intraoral scanner (IOS) type, scanning technique, use of scan aids, inter-implant distance, scan span, and the number of implants warrant evaluation. In the context of capturing implant positions, intraoral scanning with ISBs demonstrates comparable accuracy to traditional impression methods, particularly in single and short-span scenarios. However, the existing data lacks sufficient information on in vivo applications to formulate clinical recommendations.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implants; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Computer-Aided Design; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Prosthesis Design
PubMed: 38691258
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-024-00543-0 -
Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society 2020Intraoral scanner (IOS) is a medical device used for capturing direct optical impressions and composed of a handheld camera (hardware), a computer and software. Digital... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Intraoral scanner (IOS) is a medical device used for capturing direct optical impressions and composed of a handheld camera (hardware), a computer and software. Digital impressions by intraoral scanning have become an increasingly popular alternative to conventional impressions. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the studies regarding the various available technologies for IOS and evaluate the most accurate IOS system for cases with multiple implants and identify the factors that can influence its accuracy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A comprehensive electronic search was done in online databases, 'Pubmed', 'Google Scholar' and 'Cochrane' based on pre-determined eligibility criteria. In-vitro studies, In-vivo studies and Randomized controlled trials assessing the accuracy of intra-oral scanner technology were selected after thorough screening. The search strategy covered all studies published until February 2019 and yielded a total of 11 articles out of which 8 studies were determined to fulfil the inclusion criteria and were selected for this review. Data extraction from the included studies was conducted by the primary author and reviewed by the second author.
RESULTS
The information collected included sample size and population, study design, intervention, scanning methods, comparisons and outcome measures. 5 out of 8 included studies compared the distance deviation of the acquired scans from the true values while the remaining 3 studies gave trueness and precision values as the outcome variables. A forest plot on scanner precision displayed slightly higher precision levels in the TRIOS scanner compared to the other intraoral scanners.
CONCLUSION
Despite the limitations this study, it can be concluded that active wavefront sampling is more accurate than the other intraoral scanning technology employed by commercial scanners.
PubMed: 32655218
DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_379_19 -
Journal of Healthcare Engineering 2020The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the accuracy of the three-dimensional images among different scanners, scanning techniques, and substrates. .... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the accuracy of the three-dimensional images among different scanners, scanning techniques, and substrates. . Electronic databases (PubMed and Elsevier) were searched until March 2020. The systematic search was performed to identify the most precise method of obtaining a 3D image of the dentition.
RESULTS
Thirteen articles out of 221, considering the accuracy of 3D images, were selected. The main factors that are considered to have an influence on the precision are substrate type in the oral cavity, experience of the scanner's operator, direct vs. indirect scanning, and the reproducibility of the procedure.
CONCLUSION
Substrate type does have an impact on the overall accuracy of intraoral scans where dentin has the most and enamel the least accurately recorded dental structure. Experience of the operator has an influence on the accuracy, where more experienced operators and smaller scan sizes are made for more accurate scans. A conventional impression technique in a full-arch image provided the lowest deviation. The reproducibility of direct scanning was comparable to indirect scanning although a slight difference was noticeable (0.02 mm).
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Dental Impression Technique; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Models, Dental; Mouth; Reproducibility of Results; Research Design
PubMed: 33414902
DOI: 10.1155/2020/8854204