-
Journal of Prosthodontics : Official... Dec 2023To evaluate the influence of implant scan body (ISB) design (height, diameter, geometry, material, and retention system) on the accuracy of digital implant scans.
PURPOSE
To evaluate the influence of implant scan body (ISB) design (height, diameter, geometry, material, and retention system) on the accuracy of digital implant scans.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A literature search was completed in five databases: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, World of Science, and Cochrane. A manual search was also conducted. Studies reporting the evaluation of ISB design on the accuracy of digital scans obtained by using IOSs were included. Two investigators evaluated the studies independently by applying the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal. A third examiner was consulted to resolve any lack of consensus. Articles were classified based on the ISB features of height, geometry, material, and retention system.
RESULTS
Twenty articles were included. Among the reviewed studies, 11 investigations analyzed the influence of different ISB geometries, 1 study assessed the impact of ISB diameter, 4 studies investigated the effect of ISB splinting, 2 articles evaluated ISB height, and 2 studies focused on the effect of ISB material on scan accuracy. In addition, 8 studies involved ISBs fabricated with different materials (1- and 2-piece polyetheretherketone and 1-piece titanium ISBs), and all of the reviewed articles tested screw-retained ISBs, except for 3 in vitro studies.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings did not enable concrete conclusions regarding the optimal ISB design, whether there is a relationship between IOS technology and a specific ISB design, or the clinical condition that maximizes intraoral scanning accuracy. Research efforts are needed to identify the optimal ISB design and its possible relationship with the IOS selected for acquiring intraoral digital implant scans.
Topics: Dental Implants; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Dental Impression Technique; Computer-Aided Design; Models, Dental
PubMed: 37771200
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13774 -
Journal of Prosthodontics : Official... Dec 2023To evaluate accuracy, scanning time, and patient satisfaction of photogrammetry (PG) systems for recording the 3D position of dental implants.
PURPOSE
To evaluate accuracy, scanning time, and patient satisfaction of photogrammetry (PG) systems for recording the 3D position of dental implants.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A literature search was completed in five databases: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, World of Science, and Cochrane. A manual search was also conducted. Studies reporting the use of commercially available PG systems were included. Two investigators evaluated the studies independently by applying the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal. A third examiner was consulted to resolve any lack of consensus.
RESULTS
A total of 14 articles were included: 3 in vivo, 6 in vitro, and 6 case report manuscripts. One clinical study evaluated trueness, another one tested precision, and the third one assessed impression time and patient and operator satisfaction. All the in vitro studies evaluated the trueness and precision of a PG system. Additionally, all the reviewed studies investigated completely edentulous conditions with multiple implants. The number of placed implants per arch among the reviewed clinical studies varied from 4 to 8 implants, while the number of implants placed on the reference casts included 4, 5, 6, or 8 implants. Not all the studies compared the accuracy of PG systems with conventional impression methods, using intraoral scanners as additional experimental groups. For the PIC system, trueness ranged from 10 to 49 μm and precision ranged from 5 to 65 μm. For the iCam4D system, trueness ranged from 24 to 77 μm and the precision value ranged from 2 to 203 μm.
CONCLUSIONS
PG systems may provide a reliable alternative for acquiring the 3D position of dental implants. However, this conclusion should be interpreted carefully, as one study reported a mean precision value of one PG system higher than the clinically acceptable discrepancy. Lower scanning time and higher patient and operator satisfaction have been reported when compared with conventional techniques. Further studies are needed to increase the evidence regarding the accuracy, scanning time, and patient and operator satisfaction of the commercially available PG systems.
Topics: Humans; Computer-Aided Design; Dental Implants; Dental Impression Technique; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Models, Dental; Patient Satisfaction; Photogrammetry
PubMed: 37591510
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13751 -
European Journal of Oral Sciences Dec 2022Advances of digital technology are rapidly adopted in dental practice. This systematic review aimed to collect evidence on the accuracy of fit of different types of... (Review)
Review
Advances of digital technology are rapidly adopted in dental practice. This systematic review aimed to collect evidence on the accuracy of fit of different types of fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) fabricated through digital, conventional, or combination impression techniques. Data collection was based on the guidelines of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA). Two databases (PubMed, Scopus) were searched for articles in English published between 2010 and 2021 resulting in 480 articles. Of those, 35 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. These articles referred to three groups of materials/techniques including all-ceramic (zirconia; lithium disilicate) and porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM) restorations. Results showed clinically acceptable marginal fit (< 120 μm) for all materials and impression techniques. Α fully digital workflow appears more promising for the construction of short-span zirconia FDPs. Nevertheless, most articles evaluated marginal/internal fit of single crowns or short-span FDPs in vitro, while clinical data are limited for long-span FDPs. The necessity for gingival retraction remains a major drawback of all impression techniques, increasing procedural time and patient discomfort. Besides, factors related to the fabrication process, including milling and 3D printing of working models significantly influence the outcome. Overall, there still some way to go before digital technology can be incorporated in complex treatment plans in prosthodontics.
Topics: Humans; Dental Prosthesis; Dental Restoration, Permanent
PubMed: 36346664
DOI: 10.1111/eos.12902 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Jul 2023Intraoral scanning has been reported to be preferred by patients over conventional impression making. Nevertheless, information regarding patient-related outcomes for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Intraoral scanning has been reported to be preferred by patients over conventional impression making. Nevertheless, information regarding patient-related outcomes for conventional impression making and digital scanning is sparse.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze patient-related outcomes of intraoral scanning and conventional impression methods. The primary outcomes evaluated were patient preference and satisfaction, and the secondary outcomes discomfort, nausea, unpleasant taste, breathing difficulty, pain, and anxiety.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Electronic and manual searches were performed for clinical trials that evaluated patient-related outcomes for intraoral scanning and conventional impression making for prosthetic rehabilitation. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of the studies. Random-effects models using mean difference were used for meta-analyses. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran Q test and I statistics (α=.05).
RESULTS
The search strategy identified 1626 articles, and 11 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Patients preferred intraoral scanning to conventional impression making. The mean difference for patient preference was 15.02 (95% confidence interval of 8.33 - 21.73; P<.001). Discomfort, absence of nausea, absence of unpleasant taste, and absence of breathing difficulty were also significantly different (P<.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Intraoral scanning is a suitable alternative to conventional impression procedures, promoting less discomfort for patients sensitive to taste, nausea, and breathing difficulty than when conventional impression making techniques are used.
Topics: Humans; Dental Impression Technique; Patient Preference; Computer-Aided Design
PubMed: 34756424
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.08.022 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Sep 2021Digital and conventional options for definitive impressions and for the fabrication of fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) have been compared in previous studies. However, a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Digital and conventional options for definitive impressions and for the fabrication of fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) have been compared in previous studies. However, a comprehensive review with concluding data that determined which method provided the minimal internal and marginal adaptation is lacking.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis of in vivo and in vitro studies was to compare the marginal and internal adaptation of complete-coverage single-unit crowns and multiunit FDPs resulting from digital and conventional impression and fabrication methods.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The review protocol was registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. PubMed, Cochrane Trials, Scopus, and Open Grey databases were used to identify relevant articles. Based on fixed prostheses impression and fabrication methods, groups from each study were categorized into 4 groups: conventional impression and fabrication (CC), conventional impression and digital fabrication (CD), digital scanning and conventional fabrication (DC), and digital scanning and fabrication (DD). The risk of bias was assessed by using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for clinical trials and the modified Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) for in vitro studies. Heterogeneity was evaluated among studies, and meta-analysis was performed with random-effect models (α=.05). Subgroup analysis was conducted when possible.
RESULTS
Eight clinical trials and 21 in vitro studies were eligible for analysis. There was no significant difference between the CD and DD clinical groups for marginal adaptation (P=.149); However, the DD group had significantly less internal discrepancy than the CD group (P=.009). The in vitro studies found no significant difference in marginal adaptation among the CC-CD, CC-DC, and CC-DD pairs (P=.437, P=.387, P=.587), but in the comparison CD versus DD group, a significantly better marginal adaptation was observed for the DD group (P=.001). All the compared in vitro groups were similar in terms of internal adaptation.
CONCLUSIONS
Impression and fabrication techniques may affect the accuracy of fit of complete-coverage fixed restorations. A completely digital workflow yielded restorations with comparable or better marginal adaptation than the other methods.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Crowns; Dental Impression Technique; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Dental Prosthesis Design; Workflow
PubMed: 32928518
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.07.007 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Oct 2022The technology behind optical scanners has greatly improved recently, making their dental application advantageous. While their accuracy is now comparable with that of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Patient preference and clinical working time between digital scanning and conventional impression making for implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
The technology behind optical scanners has greatly improved recently, making their dental application advantageous. While their accuracy is now comparable with that of conventional impression materials, whether these techniques have other advantages is unclear.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine whether digital scanning for implant-supported restorations is more time-efficient and convenient for the patient.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The study was conducted on September 23, 2020 using 4 different databases (Medline, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus) searching for clinical studies that compared the time needed and/or patient perceptions between those who had undergone the digital scanning procedure and those who had undergone conventional impression making.
RESULTS
Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria for qualitative and quantitative analysis. Outcome variables were measured as standard mean differences (SMDs) by following a fixed-effects model or random-effects model (in the case of high heterogeneity). Digital scanning was more time-efficient and was preferred by patients for all 4 analyzed outcomes (comfort, anxiety, nausea, time perception).
CONCLUSIONS
Digital scanning was found to be more time-efficient and convenient than conventional impression making for implant-supported restorations. Additional randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the findings of this review.
Topics: Humans; Dental Impression Technique; Computer-Aided Design; Patient Preference; Dental Implants; Dental Impression Materials
PubMed: 33678434
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.11.042 -
The Saudi Dental Journal May 2020The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis study was to identify the different disinfection methods and materials and the existing evidence on their... (Review)
Review
Effect of chemical, microwave irradiation, steam autoclave, ultraviolet light radiation, ozone and electrolyzed oxidizing water disinfection on properties of impression materials: A systematic review and meta-analysis study.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis study was to identify the different disinfection methods and materials and the existing evidence on their effect on properties of the different impression materials.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic search of MEDLINE (PubMed), Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases was performed to retrieve related English-language articles published between January 2000 and July 2019. Available studies with search terms such as: Impression disinfection, disinfection method, impression dimensional stability and impression wettability were used. The selected articles were reviewed by screening their titles and abstracts and full text. Finally, a total of 70 articles were considered relevant and were included in this study.
RESULTS
Extensive studies were conducted to determine the effect of the different disinfection methods and materials on the properties of the different impression materials such as dimensional stability, wettability and surface roughness. While some studies reported significant changes in the properties of the impression materials, others reported either no changes or minor insignificant effects.
CONCLUSIONS
Some studies reported significant changes in the properties of the impression materials as a result of using different disinfection methods, whereas others reported either minor insignificant or no changes. Although the findings of the studies were controversial, care should be taken to avoid distortion of impressions and loss of their surface details that can adversely affect the fitting accuracy of the restorations. Therefore, better designed and standardized studies are needed to evaluate the effect of different commonly used disinfectants on properties of impression materials. Moreover, manufacturers should be encouraged to recommend specific disinfection methods and materials for disinfecting the impression materials to ensure their optimal accuracy.
PubMed: 32405219
DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2019.12.003 -
Implant Dentistry Dec 2017The objective was to provide a comprehensive systematic review about the accuracy of digital implant impression in comparison with the conventional implant impression... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The objective was to provide a comprehensive systematic review about the accuracy of digital implant impression in comparison with the conventional implant impression approach.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane databases were used to classify the related articles with no year limitation in 3 stages by 2 reviewers. Finally, 10 articles were included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria.
RESULTS
Five articles supported the use of intraoral scanners in implant dentistry. The two in vivo pilot studies showed that digital scanning is not reliable and could not be used in clinical routine.
CONCLUSION
Because each study included in this review has its unique methodology and design, it is therefore early to conclude whether to use digital scanners for clinical practice or not. More well-conducted in vitro and clinical trials studies are recommended to investigate the accuracy of intraoral scanners.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Dental Implants; Dental Impression Materials; Dental Impression Technique; Humans; Models, Dental
PubMed: 29095786
DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000683 -
Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic... Oct 2015Utility of various dental materials ranging from diagnosis to rehabilitation for the management of oral diseases are not devoid of posing a potential risk of inducing... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Utility of various dental materials ranging from diagnosis to rehabilitation for the management of oral diseases are not devoid of posing a potential risk of inducing allergic reactions to the patient, technician and dentist. This review aims to develop a systematic approach for the selection and monitoring of dental materials available in the market thereby giving an insight to predict their risk of inducing allergic reactions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Our data included 71 relevant articles which included 60 case reports, 8 prospective studies and 3 retrospective studies. The source of these articles was Pub Med search done with the following terms: allergies to impression materials, sodium hypochlorite, Ledermix paste, zinc oxide eugenol, formaldehyde, Latex gloves, Methyl methacrylate, fissure sealant, composites, mercury, Nickel-chromium, Titanium, polishing paste and local anaesthesia. All the relevant articles and their references were analysed. The clinical manifestations of allergy to different dental materials based on different case reports were reviewed.
RESULTS
After reviewing the literature, we found that the dental material reported to cause most adverse reactions in patients is amalgam and the incidence of oral lichenoid reactions adjacent to amalgam restorations occur more often than other dental materials.
CONCLUSION
The most common allergic reactions in dental staff are allergies to latex, acrylates and formaldehyde. While polymethylmethacrylates and latex trigger delayed hypersensitivity reactions, sodium metabisulphite and nickel cause immediate reactions. Over the last few years, due to the rise in number of patients with allergies from different materials, the practicing dentists should have knowledge about documented allergies to known materials and thus avoid such allergic manifestations in the dental clinic.
PubMed: 26557634
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/15640.6589 -
Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related... Oct 2015Several studies link the seamless fit of implant-supported prosthesis with the accuracy of the dental impression technique obtained during acquisition. In addition,... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
BACKGROUND
Several studies link the seamless fit of implant-supported prosthesis with the accuracy of the dental impression technique obtained during acquisition. In addition, factors such as implant angulation and coping shape contribute to implant misfit.
PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to identify the most accurate impression technique and factors affecting the impression accuracy.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature was conducted analyzing articles published between 2009 and 2013. The following search terms were used: implant impression, impression accuracy, and implant misfit. A total of 417 articles were identified; 32 were selected for review.
RESULTS
All 32 selected studies refer to in vitro studies. Fourteen articles compare open and closed impression technique, 8 advocate the open technique, and 6 report similar results. Other 14 articles evaluate splinted and non-splinted techniques; all advocating the splinted technique. Polyether material usage was reported in nine; six studies tested vinyl polysiloxane and one study used irreversible hydrocolloid. Eight studies evaluated different copings designs. Intraoral optical devices were compared in four studies.
CONCLUSIONS
The most accurate results were achieved with two configurations: (1) the optical intraoral system with powder and (2) the open technique with splinted squared transfer copings, using polyether as impression material.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Impression Technique; Dental Prosthesis Design; Humans
PubMed: 25828851
DOI: 10.1111/cid.12310