-
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 -
The European Journal of Prosthodontics... Feb 2024Additive manufacturing is a tool with potential use in medicine and dentistry. The manufacture of metals and composites is already advanced, however, concerns about...
INTRODUCTION
Additive manufacturing is a tool with potential use in medicine and dentistry. The manufacture of metals and composites is already advanced, however, concerns about titanium hypersensitivity, tissue staining, and corrosion caused by gradual material degradation encourage research into more biocompatible alternatives.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic scoping review aimed to gather studies that evaluated zirconia implants produced by additive manufacturing to describe the current stage of the printing technique and the final product.
METHODS
Searches in Embase, PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were enriched with manual searches between February and March 2021 and updated in June 2022 using keywords: zirconium implants, zirconium oxide, additive manufacturing, rapid prototyping, 3D printing, selective laser melting, and electron beam melting. The criteria included studies that evaluated or described zirconia implants obtained by 3D printing, with a direct relationship to dentistry or orthopedics.
RESULTS
The database search resulted in 671 articles. Eight articles were selected for full reading and remained in this systematic review.
CONCLUSION
The printing technique for zirconia implants is promising. However, further studies are required before implants produced by the printing technique can be tested clinically. The literature with results regarding the impression product is still limited.
Topics: Zirconium; Dental Implants; Printing, Three-Dimensional; Titanium
PubMed: 37721549
DOI: 10.1922/EJPRD_2513Kreve11 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Sep 2023Digital workflows for digital complete denture fabrication have a variety of clinical and laboratory procedures, but their outcomes and associated complications are... (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Digital workflows for digital complete denture fabrication have a variety of clinical and laboratory procedures, but their outcomes and associated complications are currently unknown.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical and laboratory procedures for digital complete dentures, their outcomes, and associated complications.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Electronic literature searches were conducted on PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for studies published from January 2000 to September 2022 and screened by 2 independent reviewers. Information on digital complete denture procedures, materials, their outcomes, and associated complications was extracted.
RESULTS
Of 266 screened studies, 39 studies were included. While 26 assessed definitive complete dentures, 7 studies assessed denture bases, 2 assessed trial dentures, and 4 assessed the digital images only. Twenty-four studies used border molded impression technique, 3 studies used a facebow record, and 7 studies used gothic arch tracing. Only 13 studies performed trial denture placement. Twenty-one studies used milling, and 17 studies used 3D printing for denture fabrication. One study reported that the retention of maxillary denture bases fabricated from a border-molded impression (14.5 to 16.1 N) was statistically higher than the retention of those fabricated from intraoral scanning (6.2 to 6.6 N). The maximum occlusal force of digital complete denture wearers was similar across different fabrication procedures. When compared with the conventional workflow, digital complete dentures required statistically shorter clinical time with 205 to 233 minutes saved. Up to 37.5% of participants reported loss of retention and up to 31.3% required a denture remake. In general, ≥1 extra visit and 1 to 4 unscheduled follow-up visits were needed. The outcomes for patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life were similar between conventional, milled, and 3D-printed complete dentures.
CONCLUSIONS
Making a border-molded impression is still preferred for better retention, and trial denture placement is still recommended to optimize the fabrication of definitive digital complete dentures.
PubMed: 37689573
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.07.027 -
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 -
The Saudi Dental Journal Jul 2023Lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDC) restorations exhibit microorganism infiltration, recurrent caries, pulpal lesions, periodontal inflammation, and cement exposure... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Lithium disilicate glass-ceramic (LDC) restorations exhibit microorganism infiltration, recurrent caries, pulpal lesions, periodontal inflammation, and cement exposure to the oral environment over time. All these factors lead to restoration failure. This systematic review aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of LDC full-coverage crowns (FCC) in permanent teeth compared with those of other full-coverage restoration materials.
MATERIALS & METHODS
Search strategies were developed for four databases: Web of Science, OVID, PubMed, and Scopus. Data extraction and quality appraisals were performed by two independent reviewers. Data on the presence of caries, post-operative sensitivity, and periodontal changes were extracted from the included clinical studies. In addition to the outcome measures, data on the sample size, study groups, method of restoration fabrication, type of impression, and type of abutment were recorded.
RESULTS
We retrieved 3989 records for the title and abstract screening. Of these, 19 clinical studies met the inclusion criteria. The overall quality of the included studies indicates a low risk of bias. Most studies reported no pulpal involvement, recurrent caries, or post-operative sensitivity and presented a favorable periodontal response after the cementation of LDC-FCC during different follow-up periods.
CONCLUSION
Based on the endodontic and periodontic clinical responses of natural tooth abutments and their supporting periodontium, LDC-FCC can be considered a clinically successful restorative option.
PubMed: 37520610
DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2023.05.012 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2023The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the perception of the patient, the chairside time, and the reliability and/or reproducibility of intraoral scanners for... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the perception of the patient, the chairside time, and the reliability and/or reproducibility of intraoral scanners for full arch in pediatric patients.
METHODS
A data search was performed in four databases (Medline-Pubmed, Scopus, ProQuest and Web of Science) in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statements. Studies were classified in three categories (patient perception, scanning or impression time and reliability and/or reproducibility). The resources, the data extraction and the quality assessment were carried out independently by two operators. The variables recorded were population characteristics, material and methods aspects and included country, study design and main conclusion. A quality assessment of the selected studies was performed with QUADAS-2 tool, and Kappa-Cohen Index was calculated to analyze examiner agreement.
RESULTS
The initial search obtained 681 publications, and finally four studies matching inclusion criteria were selected. The distribution of the studies in the categories was three for the analysis of the patient's perception and scanning or impression time; and two items to assess the reliability and/or reproducibility of intraoral scans. All included studies have a repeated measures-transversal design. The sample size ranged between 26 and 59 children with a mean age. The intraoral scanners evaluated were Lava C.O.S, Cerec Omnicam, TRIOS Classic, TRIOS 3-Cart and TRIOS Ortho. The quality assessment of the studies using QUADAS-2 tool revealed a low risk of bias while evaluating patient perception, but an unclear risk of bias in the analysis of accuracy or chairside time. In relation to the applicability concerns, the patient selection was of high risk of bias. All studies agreed that the patient perception and comfort is better with intraoral scanners in comparison with the conventional method. The accuracy or reliability of the digital procedure is not clear, being clinically acceptable. In relation with the chairside time, it depends on the intraoral scanner, with contradictory data in the different analyzed studies.
CONCLUSION
The use of intraoral scanners in children is a favorable option, finding a significantly higher patient perception and comfort with intraoral scanners compared to the conventional impression method. The evidence for reliability or reproducibility is not strong to date, however, the differences between the intraoral measurements and the digital models would be clinically acceptable.
PubMed: 37435173
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2023.1213072 -
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 -
Journal of Esthetic and Restorative... Dec 2023The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the influence of the characteristics of intraoral scan bodies (ISBs) on the accuracy of intraoral scanning. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the influence of the characteristics of intraoral scan bodies (ISBs) on the accuracy of intraoral scanning.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An electronic search was conducted through PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus and Cochrane Library, up to March 2023. The literature search intended to retrieve all relevant clinical and in vitro studies about the effect that the various properties of ISBs may have on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of intraoral scanning. Only publications in English language were selected with animal studies, case reports, case series, technique presentation articles and expert opinions being excluded.
RESULTS
A total of 28 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review. They were published between 2019 and 2023 and were all in vitro studies. Among the parameters described, the scan body material, position, geometry, height, diameter, and fixation torque were evaluated. The most common materials used for ISBs were polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and titanium alloys. The diameter and position of ISBs seemed to affect the trueness of implant impressions. Subgingival implant position and decreased ISB height affected negatively the trueness of scanning. Geometrical characteristics of ISBs also affect the implant impression accuracy, especially the bevel location and the types of designing modifications.
CONCLUSIONS
The characteristics of the currently used ISBs vary widely and the available scientific evidence is not yet conclusive about the optimal design of ISB. The implant impression accuracy achieved by any of the studied parameters is encouraging. Clinical studies are however necessary for more concrete conclusions.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
ISBs play a vital role in the digital workflow and influence significantly the accuracy and fit of implant restorations. More clinical trials are needed in order to conclude to the optimal characteristics of ISBs which would further enhance the success of the restorations.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Impression Technique; Computer-Aided Design; Research Design; Imaging, Three-Dimensional
PubMed: 37381677
DOI: 10.1111/jerd.13074 -
Evidence-based Dentistry Sep 2023To analyze the clinical outcomes of implant-supported prostheses and tooth-supported fixed prostheses, fabricated from digital and conventional impression. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To analyze the clinical outcomes of implant-supported prostheses and tooth-supported fixed prostheses, fabricated from digital and conventional impression.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The literature search was carried out on two electronic databases (PubMed and Cochrane Library). Randomized controlled trials (RCT) published from January 2011 to September 2022 were included. The bias risk was evaluated using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Further screening was done for meta-analysis according to modified Newcastle-Ottawa scoring criteria. Forest plot was generated using a statistical method of inverse variance of random effect with 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS
A total of 8 randomized controlled trials were included for systematic review out of which four studies were based on tooth-supported fixed prosthesis and remaining four were based on implant-supported prosthesis. Further screening was conducted and three studies were eligible for meta-analysis. Tooth-supported fixed prosthesis fabricated from digital impression showed no significant difference in the marginal fit in any region measured, except for occlusal region where conventional impression showed more favorable marginal fit. Implant-supported prosthesis fabricated from digital impression showed survival rates ranging from 97.3 to 100% and there was no statistically significant difference in marginal bone loss (p = 0.14).
CONCLUSION
Implant-supported prostheses fabricated from digital and conventional impressions show no significant differences in their clinical outcomes. Tooth-supported fixed prostheses fabricated from digital impression have shown favorable findings in terms of marginal fit. Despite that, there is still lack of clinical trials with larger sample size and longer follow-up periods. Future studies that fulfill these two criteria are deemed necessary.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Artificial Limbs; Prosthesis Implantation
PubMed: 37369705
DOI: 10.1038/s41432-023-00904-5 -
The International Journal of... 2023To compare the marginal gap and internal fit of fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) fabricated using intraoral vs extraoral scanning methods. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To compare the marginal gap and internal fit of fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) fabricated using intraoral vs extraoral scanning methods.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
MEDLINE/PubMed and the Cochrane database were searched. The focused PICO question was: For the fabrication of FDPs, does an intraoral scanning technique result in a different marginal gap than an extraoral scanning technique? The secondary outcome assessed was internal fit. Studies were selected based on the inclusion criteria, and a meta-analysis was performed.
RESULTS
A total of 14 studies (10 in vitro and 4 in vivo) were included in the meta-analysis. Marginal gap in single crowns was evaluated in 5 studies, copings for single crowns in 5 studies, three-unit FDPs in 3 studies, and both single-crown and three-unit FDPs in 1 study. Significantly lower marginal gap was found with intraoral scanning compared to impression scanning (P < .001) and cast scanning (P < .001), and for impression scanning compared to cast scanning (P = .037). Internal fit was superior with intraoral scanning compared to impression scanning, and this difference was significant (P < .001). No significant differences were found in internal fit with cast scanning compared to intraoral or impression scanning. The mean marginal gap/internal fit was 188.3 μm/146.2 μm with intraoral scanning, 116.29 μm/168.2 μm with impression scanning, and 195.1 μm/229.1 μm with cast scanning.
CONCLUSION
Marginal gap was lower with intraoral scanning than with impression scanning and cast scanning. Impression scanning showed less marginal gap than cast scanning. Internal fit with intraoral scanning was superior to impression scanning, but when compared to cast scanning, no difference was found.
Topics: Dental Prosthesis
PubMed: 36853226
DOI: 10.11607/ijp.7634