-
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 -
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 International Journal of Oral &... 2022The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of splinting impression copings on the accuracy of conventional impressions for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of splinting impression copings on the accuracy of conventional impressions for two-unit nonparallel implant restorations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched with no publication year or language limits, and studies comparing the accuracy of conventional impressions for two-unit nonparallel implant restorations made using splinted impression copings and nonsplinted impression copings were identified. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager software. The mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for the framework strain and marginal gap of the implant-framework connection between impressions using splinted and nonsplinted copings were statistically analyzed (α = .05).
RESULTS
Initially, 142 articles were identified after the removal of duplicates. Five in vitro studies were included in the systematic review, and four in vitro studies were included in the meta-analysis. All the included studies were focused on internal-connection implants and implant-level impressions. The implant angulation in the included studies ranged from 8 to 30 degrees. Impressions using splinted impression copings exhibited significantly smaller marginal gaps than those using nonsplinted impression copings (P = .02; mean difference [MD] = -13.34; 95% CI = -24.31 to -2.36). Moreover, with respect to the framework strain, no significant differences were found between impressions using splinted impression copings and nonsplinted impression copings (P = .47; MD = -12.64; 95% CI = -47.32 to 22.03).
CONCLUSIONS
Significantly larger marginal gaps were found in the impressions using splinted impression copings, but the clinical significance was low. Based on the limited number of studies included, splinting copings is unnecessary when making conventional impressions for two-unit nonparallel implant restorations.
Topics: Adaptation, Psychological; Dental Implants; Dental Impression Materials; Dental Impression Technique; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported
PubMed: 35904821
DOI: 10.11607/jomi.9577 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Sep 2022The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the accuracy of digital and conventional full-arch impressions in vivo. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the accuracy of digital and conventional full-arch impressions in vivo.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA and registered at the PROSPERO (CRD42021232736). Electronic and hand searches were performed to identify in vivo studies comparing the linear or 3D accuracy of digital and conventional impressions. The risk of bias (ROB) of included studies was assessed by QUADAS-2, and the overall quality of evidence was assessed by GRADE.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria, and 13 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between digital and conventional impressions in the linear measurements of tooth width, anterior Bolton ratio, overall Bolton ratio, intercanine distance (ICD), and intermolar distance (IMD). The repeated measurement mean errors (RMEs) were less than 0.1 mm, the intra-examiner intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values were more than 0.9, and the inter-examiner ICC values were more than 0.87 for both impression techniques. The 3D deviation between digital and alginate impressions was 0.09 mm. The 3D precision of both impression techniques was less than 0.1 mm.
CONCLUSIONS
The trueness of digital and alginate full-arch impressions was similar, and both impression techniques showed high precision. More research was needed to compare digital impressions and other conventional impression materials.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
For patients with completely natural dentition, the digital impressions obtained directly from intraoral scanning can be considered a viable alternative to alginate impressions.
Topics: Alginates; Computer-Aided Design; Dental Arch; Dental Impression Materials; Dental Impression Technique; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Models, Dental
PubMed: 35786783
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-022-04607-6 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Jun 2022The use of intraoral scanners (IOSs) for digital implant impressions in daily clinical practice is increasing. However, no structured literature review on the accuracy... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The use of intraoral scanners (IOSs) for digital implant impressions in daily clinical practice is increasing. However, no structured literature review on the accuracy of digital implant impressions in clinical studies has been described to date. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to answer the PICO question: Which accuracy is described for digital implant impressions in clinical studies?
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic database search was conducted in December 2021 using MeSH terms and free-text search. English-language studies addressing the accuracy of digital implant impressions in clinical studies involving at least 10 patients were included. All clinical indications were considered.
RESULTS
Eight publications between 2014 and 2021 matched the review criteria. However, the study designs showed considerable differences. The number of implants within the studies ranged from 1 to 6, and the number of patients ranged from 10 to 39. The oldest study (2014) revealed the highest deviation for linear distances at 1000 ± 650 µm, whereas the other studies reported data in the range of 360 ± 46 µm to 40 ± 20 µm. In one study, no numerical data were reported and all studies compared digital and conventional implant impressions.
CONCLUSIONS
The number of clinical studies on the accuracy of digital implant impressions is low. Thus, the impact of different factors, such as the scanpath or scanbody, could not be identified. However, the accuracy of recent IOSs for digital implant impressions in patients was shown to be clinically acceptable. Nevertheless, the transfer error still needs to be considered when fabricating implant-supported restorations.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Databases, Factual; Dental Implants; Dental Impression Technique; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Models, Dental
PubMed: 35527511
DOI: 10.1111/clr.13951 -
The International Journal of... 2022To evaluate the accuracy of virtual static articulation and to determine factors that affect its accuracy.
PURPOSE
To evaluate the accuracy of virtual static articulation and to determine factors that affect its accuracy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An electronic search up to December 21, 2020 was carried out in the PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases, and further searching was performed in the references of the evaluated articles. Studies were included if they were published in a peer-reviewed journal in English, were a clinical or laboratory study assessing only static virtual articulation accuracy without making computer-aided manufacturing restorations, used intraoral scanner (IOS) or extraoral scanner (EOS) systems, and evaluated tooth or implant cases.
RESULTS
After applying the inclusion criteria, a total of 28 studies were analyzed. Nine were clinical, and 19 were laboratory. Most of the studies indicated that virtual static articulation had a comparable accuracy to conventional methods in the presence of completely dentate arches, stable occlusal contacts, a single prepared tooth, or arches involving a single missing posterior tooth. The factors that appeared to influence the accuracy were the articulation technique, number, dimension, and location of virtual interocclusal records (VIRs), the length of articulated scans, and the position and size of edentulous areas.
CONCLUSION
Though conclusions were derived mainly from laboratory studies, static VIR had an acceptable accuracy in the presence of certain situations.
Topics: Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Computer-Aided Design; Mouth, Edentulous; Dental Impression Technique
PubMed: 35349610
DOI: 10.11607/ijp.7407 -
Journal of Prosthodontics : Official... Dec 2022Several studies have compared digital intraoral scanners and conventional impressions. The accuracy of these two methods in terms of marginal accuracy of lithium... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Several studies have compared digital intraoral scanners and conventional impressions. The accuracy of these two methods in terms of marginal accuracy of lithium disilicate crowns is not well-established, yet. The purpose of this study was to systematically review available publications on marginal fit of single-unit, full-coverage, tooth-supported lithium disilicate restorations.
METHODS
Pubmed, Web of Science, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Scopus were electronically searched along with a manual search. After critical appraisal, data from selected studies were extracted and mean marginal difference with a 95% confidence interval was calculated. Meta-analysis of the collected data was conducted using STATA software.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis revealed similar marginal gap values in intraoral scanners with conventional groups (p>0.05) and in intraoral scanners with extraoral canners (p>0.05).
CONCLUSION
No significant difference was seen between digital and conventional impressions or intra- and extraoral scanners for marginal accuracy of lithium disilicate crowns.
Topics: Humans; Workflow; Dental Impression Technique; Dental Prosthesis Design; Computer-Aided Design; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Dental Porcelain; Crowns
PubMed: 35344238
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13515 -
Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2022Dental impressions are contaminated with potentially pathogenic microorganisms when they come into contact with patient blood, saliva, and plaque. Numerous disinfectants... (Review)
Review
Dental impressions are contaminated with potentially pathogenic microorganisms when they come into contact with patient blood, saliva, and plaque. Numerous disinfectants are used; however, no sole disinfectant can be designated as universal for all the impression materials. Thus, the aim of this study is to systemically review the literature to evaluate the effect of the existing disinfection procedures on the bacterial colonization of dental impression materials. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, and SciELO databases were screened up to April 2021. Eligibility criteria included in vitro studies reporting the antibacterial activity of disinfectant solutions in dental impression materials. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager (version 5.3.5). A global comparison was performed with the standardized mean difference based on random-effect models at a significance level of α = 0.05. A total of seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. The included studies described the effect of disinfection processes with chlorhexidine gluconate, alcohol, sodium hypochlorite, glutaraldehyde, and hydrogen peroxide in alginate, polyvinyl siloxane, and polyether impression materials. The meta-analyses showed that the use of chlorhexidine, alcohol, glutaraldehyde, and sodium hypochlorite reduced the colony-forming units by a milliliter (CFU/mL) in alginate (p < 0.001). On the other hand, glutaraldehyde, sodium hypochlorite, and alcohol reduced the CFU/mL in polyvinyl siloxane (p < 0.001). Finally, alcohol and glutaraldehyde reduced the CFU/mL in polyether material (p < 0.001). High heterogenicity was observed for the alginate and polyvinyl siloxane materials (I2 = 74%; I2 = 90%). Based on these in vitro studies, the disinfection of impression materials with several disinfection agents reduces the CFU/mL count.
PubMed: 35324812
DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering9030123 -
Gels (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2022Immediate dentin sealing (IDS) involves applying an adhesive system to dentin directly after tooth preparation, before impression. This was considered an alternate to... (Review)
Review
Immediate dentin sealing (IDS) involves applying an adhesive system to dentin directly after tooth preparation, before impression. This was considered an alternate to delayed dentin sealing (DDS), a technique in which hybridization is performed following the provisional phase and just before the indirect restoration luting procedure. This study aimed to compare the bond strength of restorations to dentin of the IDS and the DDS techniques throughout a systematic review and meta-analysis. The following PICOS framework was used: population, indirect restorations; intervention, IDS; control, DDS; outcomes, bond strength; and study design, in vitro studies. PubMed (MedLine), The Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science, Scielo, Scopus, and Embase were screened up to January 2022 by two reviewers (L.H. and R.B.). In vitro papers studying the bond strength to human dentin of the IDS technique compared to the DDS technique were considered. Meta-analyses were carried out by using a software program (Review Manager v5.4.1; The Cochrane Collaboration). Comparisons were made by considering the adhesive used for bonding (two-step etch-and-rinse, three step etch-and-rinse, one-step self-etch, two-step self-etch, and universal adhesives). A total of 3717 papers were retrieved in all databases. After full-text assessment, 22 potentially eligible studies were examined for qualitative analysis, leaving a total of 21 articles for the meta-analysis. For the immediate bond strength, regardless of the adhesive strategy used, the IDS technique improved the bond strength of restorations to the dentin (p < 0.001). Taking into account the subgroup analysis, it seems that the use of the IDS technique with a two-step etch-and-rinse or a one-step self-etch adhesive system does not represent any advantage over the DDS technique (p = 0.07, p = 0.15). On the other hand, for the aged bond strength, regardless of the adhesive strategy used, the IDS technique improved the bond strength of restorations to the dentin (p = 0.001). The subgroups analysis shows that this improvement is observed only when a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system (p < 0.001) or when a combination of an adhesive system plus a layer of flowable resin (p = 0.01) is used. The in vitro evidence suggests that the use of the IDS technique improves the bond strength of dentin to resin-based restorations regardless of the adhesive strategy used. The use of a three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive system or the combination of an adhesive system plus a layer of flowable resin seems to considerably enhance the bond strength in the long term.
PubMed: 35323288
DOI: 10.3390/gels8030175 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Jun 2023The best method of optimizing the accuracy of complete arch intraoral digital scans is still unclear. For instance, the location of the scan bodies can be significantly... (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
The best method of optimizing the accuracy of complete arch intraoral digital scans is still unclear. For instance, the location of the scan bodies can be significantly distorted with respect to their actual positions, which would lead to a nonpassive fit of the definitive prosthesis.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to analyze available techniques for improving the accuracy of digital scans in implant-supported complete arch fixed prostheses.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Three databases (Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar) were searched, and the results obtained were supplemented by a hand search. Specific descriptors identified techniques whose objective were to increase the accuracy of digital scans in implant-supported complete arch fixed prostheses. Titles and abstracts were screened by 2 independent reviewers, and unclear results were discussed with a third independent reviewer. A qualitative analysis based on procedural parameters was used. The interexaminer agreements of both were assessed by the Cohen kappa statistic, and the Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess the risk of bias across the studies.
RESULTS
A total of 17 techniques matching the inclusion criteria were evaluated. Higher accuracy but also differences regarding the need for supplementary devices, number of intraoral scans, and time consumption of clinical and software program steps were observed compared with the conventional digital scanning protocol. The use of a splinting device was common to most of the studies. The outcome variables for the evaluation of the effectiveness of these protocols were heterogeneous.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of additional techniques during intraoral scanning can improve accuracy in implant-supported complete arch fixed prostheses. However, higher complexity for those procedures should be expected.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Impression Technique; Computer-Aided Design; Models, Dental; Prosthesis Implantation; Imaging, Three-Dimensional
PubMed: 34756427
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.08.018