-
Dental Materials Journal Apr 2022To compare full and partial coverage crowns made with different CAD/CAM leucite reinforced ceramic blocks on fracture resistance and fractographic analysis. Full...
To compare full and partial coverage crowns made with different CAD/CAM leucite reinforced ceramic blocks on fracture resistance and fractographic analysis. Full coverage and partial coverage crowns with finish line at 2 mm and 4 mm above the gingiva for molars made with IPS Empress CAD and Rosetta BM. After fatigue process, the fracture test and fractographic analysis were conducted. Although the fracture resistance of IPS Empress crowns did not show any statistical differences regardless of the design, both the partial coverage crowns fabricated using Rosetta BM showed significantly higher load at break and peak load than the full coverage crown. The crowns made with IPS Empress showed significantly higher fracture resistance than that made with Rosetta BM, regardless of the restorative design. The fracture resistance and fractographic analysis of CAD/CAM leucite reinforced full and partial coverage crowns were influenced by the restorative design of and material type.
Topics: Aluminum Silicates; Ceramics; Computer-Aided Design; Crowns; Dental Porcelain; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Restoration Failure; Dental Stress Analysis; Materials Testing
PubMed: 35095042
DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2021-253 -
Advances in Dental Research Dec 2019The aim of this review is to investigate the growth of diversity and inclusion in global academic dental research with a focus on gender equality. A diverse range of... (Review)
Review
The aim of this review is to investigate the growth of diversity and inclusion in global academic dental research with a focus on gender equality. A diverse range of research methodologies were used to conduct this review, including an extensive review of the literature, engagement of key informants in dental academic leadership positions around the world, and review of current data from a variety of national and international organizations. Results provide evidence of gender inequalities that currently persist in dental academics and research. Although the gender gap among graduating dental students in North America and the two most populous countries in Europe (the United Kingdom and France) has been narrowed, women make up 30% to 40% of registered dentists in countries throughout Europe, Oceania, Asia, and Africa. In academic dentistry around the globe, greater gender inequality was found to correlate with higher ranking academic and leadership positions in the United States, United Kingdom, several countries in European Union, Japan, and Saudi Arabia. Further disparities are noted in the dental research sector, where women make up 33% of dental researchers in the European Union, 35% in North America, 55% in Brazil, and 25% in Japan. Family and societal pressures, limited access to research funding, and lack of mentoring and leadership training opportunities are reported as also contributing to gender inequalities. To continue advancing gender equality in dental academia and research, efforts should be geared toward the collection and public dissemination of data on gender-specific distributions. Such evidence-driven information will guide the selection of future strategies and best practices for promoting gender equity in the dental workforce, which provides a major pipeline of researchers and scholars for the dental profession.
Topics: Demography; Dentistry; Humans; Sex Ratio; Socioeconomic Factors; Workforce
PubMed: 31746651
DOI: 10.1177/0022034519877398 -
International Journal of Molecular... Feb 2023Light is an emerging treatment approach that is being used to treat many diseases and conditions such as pain, inflammation, and wound healing. The light used in dental... (Review)
Review
Light is an emerging treatment approach that is being used to treat many diseases and conditions such as pain, inflammation, and wound healing. The light used in dental therapy generally lies in visible and invisible spectral regions. Despite many positive results in the treatment of different conditions, this therapy still faces some skepticism, which has prevented its widespread adoption in clinics. The main reason for this skepticism is the lack of comprehensive information about the molecular, cellular, and tissular mechanisms of action, which underpin the positive effects of phototherapy. However, there is currently promising evidence in support of the use of light therapy across a spectrum of oral hard and soft tissues, as well as in a variety of important dental subspecialties, such as endodontics, periodontics, orthodontics, and maxillofacial surgery. The merging of diagnostic and therapeutic light procedures is also seen as a promising area for future expansion. In the next decade, several light technologies are foreseen as becoming integral parts of modern dentistry practice.
Topics: Photobiology; Orthodontics; Endodontics; Periodontics; Surgery, Oral
PubMed: 36835395
DOI: 10.3390/ijms24043985 -
Journal of Dentistry Jul 2024Deep margin elevation (DME) is a restorative approach offering the possibility of performing stepwise elevation of deep proximal cavities to create more favourable... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Deep margin elevation (DME) is a restorative approach offering the possibility of performing stepwise elevation of deep proximal cavities to create more favourable margins for direct or indirect restorations. The objectives of this scoping review were to explore what is known or unknown about DME by describing a wide ranging evidence base including peer reviewed literature and non-traditionally published information on the web.
DATA
Data were extracted from the included evidence in order to describe the following: the extent and nature of the evidence base; the situations which are appropriate for DME; the materials and techniques which are used; the outcomes which have been measured in empirical studies; the risks which have been reported; and the findings which have been reported in studies which compared DME to surgical crown lengthening.
SOURCES
This scoping review included a wide range of published evidence and extensive web searching for grey literature, including CPD, training and multimedia information.
STUDY SELECTION
The findings revealed a range of published literature as well as freely available, online information advising practitioners about DME. Most empirical evidence was based on in vitro studies, and there were few clinical studies comparing DME to crown lengthening. Online information included recent, multimedia sources.
CONCLUSIONS
DME is a technique that can be used with motivated patients with good oral hygiene if rubber dam isolation is achieved, if there is no invasion of the connective tissue space, and if a strict restorative protocol is adhered to.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
With phasing out of amalgam and adhesive dentistry increasing in popularity, DME addresses multiple clinical problems associated with sub-gingival margins prior to restoration.
Topics: Humans; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Dental Cavity Preparation; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Crown Lengthening; Dental Materials; Dental Caries
PubMed: 38740249
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105066 -
Journal of Prosthodontic Research Apr 2024The surge in digitalization and artificial intelligence has led to the wide application of robots in various fields, but their application in dentistry started... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The surge in digitalization and artificial intelligence has led to the wide application of robots in various fields, but their application in dentistry started relatively late. This scoping review aimed to comprehensively explore and map the current status of the clinical application of robots in dentistry.
STUDY SELECTION
An iterative approach was used to gather as much evidence as possible from four online databases, including PubMed, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, from January 1980 to December 2022.
RESULTS
A total of 113 eligible articles were selected from the search results, and it was found that most of the robots were developed and applied in the United States (n = 56; 50%). Robots were clinically applied in oral and maxillofacial surgery, oral implantology, prosthodontics, orthodontics, endodontics, and oral medicine. The development of robots in oral and maxillofacial surgery and oral implantology is relatively fast and comprehensive. About 51% (n = 58) of the systems had reached clinical application, while 49% (n = 55) were at the pre-clinical stage. Most of these are hard robots (90%; n = 103), and their invention and development were mainly focused on university research groups with long research periods and diverse components.
CONCLUSIONS
There are still limitations and gaps between research and application in dental robots. While robotics is threatening to replace clinical decision-making, combining it with dentistry to gain maximum benefit remains a challenge for the future.
Topics: Humans; Artificial Intelligence; Robotics; Oral Medicine; Surgery, Oral; Prosthodontics
PubMed: 37302842
DOI: 10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_23_00027 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Nov 2023This systematic review assessed the available evidence on the survival and success rate of zirconia and titanium implants. As secondary outcomes, aesthetic, radiographic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review assessed the available evidence on the survival and success rate of zirconia and titanium implants. As secondary outcomes, aesthetic, radiographic and clinical parameters, as well as biological and mechanical complications, were considered.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search was performed up to March 2022 to identify CCTs/RCTs comparing zirconia and titanium implants with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. Meta-analysis was performed when ≥ 2 articles with similar characteristics were retrieved.
RESULTS
Four published articles with two RCTs (2 different patient populations) with 100 zirconia and 99 titanium implants that were followed up over 12-80 months were selected out of the 6040 articles. A non-statistically significant difference between zirconia and titanium implant survival at 12 months was suggested (P = 0.0938). The success rates were 57.5-93.3% and 57.1-100% for zirconia and titanium implants, respectively. The pink aesthetic score (PES) was higher for zirconia (10.33 ± 2.06 to 11.38 ± 0.92) compared to titanium implants (8.14 ± 3.58 to 11.56 ± 1.0).
CONCLUSION
Based on the 2 RCTs retrieved in the literature, similar survival rates were reported for zirconia and titanium implants in the short term (12 months of follow-up). Future RCTs are warranted to evaluate the long-term outcomes of zirconia implants.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Zirconia implants may be the procedure of choice, particularly in the aesthetic zone, since they show a similar survival and success rate as titanium implants on a short-term follow-up.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Systematic review registration number-CRD42021288704 (PROSPERO).
Topics: Humans; Dental Implants; Titanium; Dental Restoration Failure; Esthetics, Dental; Zirconium; Dental Prosthesis Design
PubMed: 37740825
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-05242-5 -
Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Jan 2022In general, the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) in dentistry is high, and dental assistants (DA) are even more affected than dentists (D)....
A RULA-Based Comparison of the Ergonomic Risk of Typical Working Procedures for Dentists and Dental Assistants of General Dentistry, Endodontology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, and Orthodontics.
BACKGROUND
In general, the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) in dentistry is high, and dental assistants (DA) are even more affected than dentists (D). Furthermore, differentiations between the fields of dental specialization (e.g., general dentistry, endodontology, oral and maxillofacial surgery, or orthodontics) are rare. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the ergonomic risk of the aforementioned four fields of dental specialization for D and DA on the one hand, and to compare the ergonomic risk of D and DA within each individual field of dental specialization.
METHODS
In total, 60 dentists (33 male/27 female) and 60 dental assistants (11 male/49 female) volunteered in this study. The sample was composed of 15 dentists and 15 dental assistants from each of the dental field, in order to represent the fields of dental specialization. In a laboratory setting, all tasks were recorded using an inertial motion capture system. The kinematic data were applied to an automated version of the Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA).
RESULTS
The results revealed significantly reduced ergonomic risks in endodontology and orthodontics compared to oral and maxillofacial surgery and general dentistry in DAs, while orthodontics showed a significantly reduced ergonomic risk compared to general dentistry in Ds. Further differences between the fields of dental specialization were found in the right wrist, right lower arm, and left lower arm in DAs and in the neck, right wrist, right lower arm, and left wrist in Ds. The differences between Ds and DAs within a specialist discipline were rather small.
DISCUSSION
Independent of whether one works as a D or DA, the percentage of time spent working in higher risk scores is reduced in endodontologists, and especially in orthodontics, compared to general dentists or oral and maxillofacial surgeons. In order to counteract the development of WMSD, early intervention should be made. Consequently, ergonomic training or strength training is recommended.
Topics: Dental Assistants; Dentists; Endodontics; Ergonomics; Female; Humans; Male; Occupational Diseases; Orthodontics; Surgery, Oral; Upper Extremity
PubMed: 35161550
DOI: 10.3390/s22030805 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Oct 2003Implant dentistry has become successful with the discovery of the biological properties of titanium. In the original protocol, studies have advocated a 2-stage surgical... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Implant dentistry has become successful with the discovery of the biological properties of titanium. In the original protocol, studies have advocated a 2-stage surgical protocol for load-free and submerged healing to ensure predictable osseointegration. However, the discomfort, inconvenience, and anxiety associated with waiting period remains a challenge to both patients and clinicians. Hence, loading implant right after placement was attempted and has gained popularity among clinicians. Issues/questions related to this approach remain unanswered. Therefore, it is the purpose of this review article to (1). review and analyze critically the current available literature in the field of immediate implant loading and (2). discuss, based on scientific evidence, factors that may influence this treatment modality.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Literature published over the past 20 years was selected and reviewed. Findings from these studies were discussed and summarized in the tables. The advantages and disadvantages associated with immediate implant loading were analyzed. Factors that may influence the success of immediate implant loading, including patient selection, type of bone quality, required implant length, micro- and macrostructure of the implant, surgical skill, need for achieving primary stability/control of occlusal force, and prosthesis guidelines, were thoroughly reviewed and discussed.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
Various studies have demonstrated the feasibility and predictability of this technique. However, most of these articles are based on retrospective data or uncontrolled cases. Randomized, prospective, parallel-armed longitudinal human trials are primarily based on short-term results and long-term follow-ups are still scarce in this field. Nonetheless, from available literature, it may be concluded that anatomic locations, implant designs, and restricted prosthetic guidelines are key to ensure successful outcomes. Future studies, preferably randomized, prospective longitudinal studies, are certainly needed before this approach can be widely used.
Topics: Bite Force; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Stress Analysis; Denture, Complete, Immediate; Denture, Partial, Immediate; Humans; Surface Properties
PubMed: 12969355
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.00950.x -
Progress in Orthodontics Mar 2019To evaluate differences between orthodontists and general dentists in experience with clear aligners (CA), patients' demand and perception, types of patients, and... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate differences between orthodontists and general dentists in experience with clear aligners (CA), patients' demand and perception, types of patients, and malocclusion treated with CA and to compare the two groups of clinicians not using CA in their practice.
METHODS
A Web-based survey was developed and sent to the 129 members of the European Aligner Society and randomly to 200 doctors of dental surgery by e-mail. They responded on demographics and to one of two different parts for clinicians using CA or not using CA. Statistical analysis was performed with SAS EGv.6.1.
RESULTS
The response rate was 74%. Among the total of respondents, the majority reported utilizing CA in their practice with a greater percentage of orthodontists (P = 0.0040). Overall, orthodontists learned more about CA during academic seminars comparing to general dentists, and they treated more class I with crowding (P = 0.0002) and with open bite (P = 0.0462). The majority of patients treated with CA were female and adults with a full-time employment, and the patients' knowledge about CA treatment was mainly provided by information from external media advertising. For respondents not using CA, orthodontists were more likely to report that CA limit treatment outcomes, whereas general practitioners were reported not having enough experience to use them.
CONCLUSIONS
There were some significant differences between orthodontists and general dentists mainly in experience and case selection for clinicians using CA as well as in the reasons provided for not using CA in their practice.
Topics: Child; Dentistry; Female; Humans; Male; Orthodontic Appliances, Removable; Orthodontics; Palatal Expansion Technique; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 30854613
DOI: 10.1186/s40510-019-0263-3 -
Head & Face Medicine Aug 2023The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in orthodontics and orthognathic surgery has gained significant attention in recent years. However, there is a lack of...
BACKGROUND
The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in orthodontics and orthognathic surgery has gained significant attention in recent years. However, there is a lack of bibliometric reports that analyze the academic literature in this field to identify publishing and citation trends. By conducting an analysis of the top 100 most-cited articles on AI in orthodontics and orthognathic surgery, we aim to unveil popular research topics, key authors, institutions, countries, and journals in this area.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was conducted in the Web of Science (WOS) electronic database to identify the top 100 most-cited articles on AI in orthodontics and orthognathic surgery. Publication and citation data were obtained and further analyzed and visualized using R Biblioshiny. The key domains of the 100 articles were also identified.
RESULTS
The top 100 most-cited articles were published between 2005 and 2022, contributed by 458 authors, with an average citation count of 22.09. South Korea emerged as the leading contributor with the highest number of publications (28) and citations (595), followed by China (16, 373), and the United States (7, 248). Notably, six South Korean authors ranked among the top 10 contributors, and three South Korean institutions were listed as the most productive. International collaborations were predominantly observed between the United States, China, and South Korea. The main domains of the articles focused on automated imaging assessment (42%), aiding diagnosis and treatment planning (34%), and the assessment of growth and development (10%). Besides, a positive correlation was observed between the testing sample size and citation counts (P = 0.010), as well as between the time of publication and citation counts (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
The utilization of AI in orthodontics and orthognathic surgery has shown remarkable progress, particularly in the domains of imaging analysis, diagnosis and treatment planning, and growth and development assessment. This bibliometric analysis provides valuable insights into the top-cited articles and the trends of AI research in this field.
Topics: Humans; Orthognathic Surgery; Orthodontics; Artificial Intelligence; Dental Care; Bibliometrics
PubMed: 37612673
DOI: 10.1186/s13005-023-00383-0