Accuracy of dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in fully edentulous patients: An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare miniscrew versus bone tracing registration methods on dental implant placement accuracy and time efficiency in edentulous jaws using a dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (d-CAIS) system. METHODS: Twelve fully edentulous maxillary models were allocated into two groups: miniscrew tracing (MST) group, where registration was performed by tracing four miniscrews; and bone tracing (BT) group, where registration was conducted by tracing maxillary bone fiducial landmarks. Six implants were placed on each model using the X-Guide® d-CAIS system. Pre- and postoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were superimposed to evaluate implant placement accuracy. The time required for registration and the overall surgery time were also recorded. RESULTS: Thirty-six implants were placed in each group. The MST group showed significantly lower mean angulation deviations (mean difference (MD): -3.33°; 95 % confidence interval (CI): -6.56 to -0.09); p = 0.044), 3D platform deviations (MD: -1.01 mm; 95 % CI: -1.74 to -0.29; p = 0.006), 2D platform deviations (MD: -0.97 mm; 95 % CI: -1.71 to -0.23; p = 0.010), and 3D apex deviations (MD: -1.18 mm; 95 % CI: -1.92 to -0.44; p = 0.002) versus the BT group. The overall surgery time was similar for both groups (MD: 6.10 min.; 95 % CI: -0.31 to 12.51; p = 0.06), though bone tracing required significantly more time compared with miniscrew registration (MD: 4.79 min.; 95 % CI: 2.96 to 6.62; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Registration with MST increases the accuracy of implant placement with a d-CAIS system in edentulous jaws compared with the BT method, and slightly reduces the overall surgery time. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Miniscrew tracing registration improves implant placement accuracy in comparison with bone tracing registration.

The effect on the performance of a dynamic navigation system of superimposing a standard tessellation language (STL) file obtained with an intraoral scan on a cone beam computer tomograph (CBCT). An experimental in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy and operative time of implant placement using a dynamic computer assisted implant surgery (dCAIS) system based on a cone beam computer tomography (CBCT) image, with and without superimposing a standard tessellation language (STL) file of an intraoral scan of the patient. METHODS: Ten identical resin models simulating an upper maxilla with posterior edentulism were assigned to two groups. In the CBCT+STL group, a CBCT file and an intraoral STL file were superimposed and used for registration; in the CBCT group, registration was performed using CBCT images. Six implants were placed in each model using the Navident® dynamic navigation system. Anatomy registration was performed by tracing fiducial points on the CBCT or STL image, depending on the group. Preoperative and postoperative CBCT images were overlaid to assess implant placement accuracy. RESULTS: Sixty implants were analyzed (30 implants in each group). 3D platform deviation was significantly lower (mean difference (MD): 0.17 mm; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.01 to 0.23; P = 0.039) in the CBCT+STL group (mean: 0.71 mm; standard deviation (SD): 0.29) than in the CBCT group (mean: 0.88 mm; SD: 0.39). The remaining accuracy outcome variables (angular deviation MD: -0.01; platform lateral deviation MD: 0.08 mm; apex global MD: 0.01 mm; apex depth MD: 0.33 mm) and surgery time (MD: 3.383 min.) were similar in both groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of an intraoral scan (STL) seems to reduce deviations slightly in dental implant placement with dCAIS systems. However, the clinical repercussion of this improvement is questionable. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Superimposing an intraoral scan on the CBCT image does not seem to increase the accuracy of dCAIS systems but can be useful when radiographic artifacts are present.

Peri-implantitis in patients without regular supportive therapy: Prevalence and risk indicators.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of peri-implant diseases in patients treated in a university setting without a regular peri-implant supportive therapy schedule, and to identify the risk indicators associated with peri-implantitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was made of patients with dental implants with at least 12 months of functional loading who did not receive regular peri-implant supportive therapy. Patient- and implant-related variables were retrieved, and clinical and radiological examinations were performed. Descriptive and bivariate analyses and multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with peri-implantitis. RESULTS: A total of 213 implants in 88 patients were analyzed. The patient-level prevalence of peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis was 26.1% (95%CI: 16.7%-35.5%) and 44.3% (95%CI: 34.0%-54.6%), respectively. Peri-implant diseases were significantly more frequent when the width of the keratinized mucosa was < 2 mm (OR = 5.26; 95%CI: 1.24-22.26; p = 0.024), and when there was 12 month post-loading bone loss (OR = 2.96; 95%CI: 1.35-6.52; p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Peri-implantitis is a common finding in patients without regular peri-implant supportive therapy (prevalence 16.7-35.5%). A thin peri-implant keratinized mucosa (< 2 mm) and a higher degree of bone remodeling after loading seem to be the main risk factors for peri-implantitis in this patient profile. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients who do not engage in supportive peri-implant maintenance have a higher risk of peri-implantitis. A thin keratinized mucosa and bone loss during the first year of loading are predisposing factors for peri-implantitis.

Efficacy of the use of chondroitin sulphate and glucosamine for the treatment of temporomandibular joint dysfunction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of chondroitin sulfate (CS) and glucosamine (GS), the most relevant drugs of "Symptomatic Slow Acting Drug for Osteoarthritis" (SYSADOA), in the functional and symptomatic improvement of temporomandibular dysfunction. Although, controversy exists regarding their benefit. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted to retrieve randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). The risk of bias assessment was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Data were meta-analyzed with a random effect model whenever possible. RESULTS: Three RCTs were included. Qualitative results showed a decrease in pain, joint noise, and inflammatory biomarkers in synovial fluid and an improvement in maximum mouth opening without significant adverse effects. Meta-analysis showed a significant increase in maximum mouth opening with the use of CS-GS (p = 0.19). No statistically significant differences were found in pain reduction compared to tramadol. CONCLUSION: CS-GS is effective and safe in the symptomatic and functional improvement of patients with TMD.