Influence of scanning protocol on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant scans: An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVE: This in-vitro study assessed the influence of two intraoral scanning (IOS) protocols on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of digital scans performed in edentulous arches. METHODS: Twenty-two abutment-level master casts of edentulous arches with at least four implants were scanned repeatedly five times, each with two different scanning protocols. Protocol A (IOS-A) consisted of scanning the edentulous arch before inserting the implant scan bodies, followed by their insertion and its subsequent digital acquisition. Protocol B (IOS-B) consisted of scanning the edentulous arch with the scan bodies inserted from the outset. A reference scan from each edentulous cast was obtained using a laboratory scanner. Trueness and precision were calculated using the spatial fit analysis, cross-arch distance, and virtual Sheffield test. Statistical analysis was performed using generalized estimating equations (GEEs). Statistical significance was set at α = .05. RESULTS: In the spatial fit test, the precision of average 3D distances was 45 µm (±23 µm) with protocol IOS-A and 25 µm (±10 µm) for IOS-B (p < .001), and the trueness of average 3D distances was 44 µm (±24 µm) with protocol IOS-A and 24 µm (±7 µm) for IOS-B (p < .001). Cross-arch distance precision was 59 µm (±53 µm) for IOS-A and 41 µm (±43 µm) for IOS-B (p = .0035), and trueness was 64 µm (±47 µm) for IOS-A and 50 µm (±40 µm) for IOS-B (p = .0021). Virtual Sheffield precision was 286 µm (±198 µm) for IOS-A and 146 µm (±92 µm) for IOS-B (p < .001), and trueness was 228 µm (±171 µm) for IOS-A and 139 µm (±92 µm) for IOS-B (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The IOS-B protocol demonstrated significantly superior accuracy. Placement of scan bodies before scanning the edentulous arch is recommended to improve the accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scanning.

Accuracy of manual and artificial intelligence-based superimposition of cone-beam computed tomography with digital scan data, utilizing an implant planning software: A randomized clinical study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the accuracy of conventional and automatic artificial intelligence (AI)-based registration of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) with intraoral scans and to evaluate the impact of user's experience, restoration artifact, number of missing teeth, and free-ended edentulous area. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three initial registrations were performed for each of the 150 randomly selected patients, in an implant planning software: one from an experienced user, one from an inexperienced operator, and one from a randomly selected post-graduate student of implant dentistry. Six more registrations were performed for each dataset by the experienced clinician: implementing a manual or an automatic refinement, selecting 3 small or 3 large in-diameter surface areas and using multiple small or multiple large in-diameter surface areas. Finally, an automatic AI-driven registration was performed, using the AI tools that were integrated into the utilized implant planning software. The accuracy between each type of registration was measured using linear measurements between anatomical landmarks in metrology software. RESULTS: Fully automatic-based AI registration was not significantly different from the conventional methods tested for patients without restorations. In the presence of multiple restoration artifacts, user's experience was important for an accurate registration. Registrations' accuracy was affected by the number of free-ended edentulous areas, but not by the absolute number of missing teeth (p < .0083). CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of imaging artifacts, automated AI-based registration of CBCT data and model scan data can be as accurate as conventional superimposition methods. The number and size of selected superimposition areas should be individually chosen depending on each clinical situation.

Accuracy of artificial intelligence-based segmentation of the mandibular canal in CBCT.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the accuracy of artificial intelligence (AI)-based segmentation of the mandibular canal, compared to the conventional manual tracing, implementing implant planning software. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Localization of the mandibular canals was performed for 104 randomly selected patients. A localization was performed by three experienced clinicians in order to serve as control. Five tracings were performed: One from a clinician with a moderate experience with a manual tracing (I1), followed by the implementation of an automatic refinement (I2), one manual from a dental student (S1), and one from the experienced clinician, followed by an automatic refinement (E). Subsequently, two fully automatic AI-driven segmentations were performed (A1,A2). The accuracy between each method was measured using root mean square error calculation. RESULTS: The discrepancy among the models of the mandibular canals, between the experienced clinicians and each investigated method ranged from 0.21 to 7.65 mm with a mean of 3.5 mm RMS error. The analysis of each separate mandibular canal's section revealed that mean RMS error was higher in the posterior and anterior loop compared to the middle section. Regarding time efficiency, tracing by experienced users required more time compared to AI-driven segmentation. CONCLUSIONS: The experience of the clinician had a significant influence on the accuracy of mandibular canal's localization. An AI-driven segmentation of the mandibular canal constitutes a time-efficient and reliable procedure for pre-operative implant planning. Nevertheless, AI-based segmentation results should always be verified, as a subsequent manual refinement of the initial segmentation may be required to avoid clinical significant errors.

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and psychostimulant use in patients seeking dental care-Associations with common orofacial pain complaints.

BACKGROUND: Dental medicine should expand its scope to properly assess medical and psychosocial factors that might have an impact on patients' oral health. Based on previous literature and clinical experience, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and psychostimulant medications might represent factors associated with orofacial pain symptoms. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess whether common orofacial pain complaints such as jaw pain, jaw clicking, teeth clenching and headaches are more prevalent in dental patients who have an ADHD diagnosis and/or use psychostimulant medications. METHODS: Orofacial pain symptoms prevalence was compared among four groups from a sample of new patients seeking dental care at Tufts University School of Dental Medicine (n = 11 699) based on ADHD diagnosis and psychostimulants intake: G1: no ADHD, no stimulants; G2: yes ADHD, yes stimulants; G3: yes ADHD, no stimulants; G4: no ADHD, yes stimulants. RESULTS: In multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for age, gender, tobacco use, and alcohol consumption, significant differences were found for clenching (p < .0001), jaw pain (p < .0001), and headache (p < .0001). Compared to G1, two groups (G2 and G4) exhibited significantly higher odds of clenching and headaches, whereas only G2 exhibited significantly higher odds of jaw pain. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison with patients without ADHD and not taking psychostimulants medications, dental patients using psychostimulants with and without ADHD diagnosis report headaches and teeth clenching more frequently, while jaw pain is reported more frequently only by those taking psychostimulants with an ADHD diagnosis. Further research is necessary to assess the nature of these associations and their clinical relevance.

Evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation of veneers generated by the guided prosthetic tooth preparation system.

OBJECTIVE: This in vitro study aimed to assess and contrast the marginal and internal adaptation of all-ceramic prefabricated veneers manufactured via the FirstFit guided tooth preparation system against all-ceramic veneers produced using the chairside Computer-Aided Design/Computer Aided Manufacture (CAD/CAM) system following identical guided preparation protocols. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two main groups were included, with 16 lithium disilicate veneers per group. Four typodonts were used for the test (FirstFit) and control CAD/CAM groups. Intraoral scans created master casts and preparation guides. Guides performed preparations on typodont teeth (two central incisors and two lateral incisors). Prepared teeth were scanned (CEREC Omnicam) to design and mill CAD/CAM veneers. Marginal gap thickness and cement space thickness were measured using light microscopy at four locations: marginal, cervical internal, middle internal, and incisal internal. RESULTS: No significant difference existed between groups for marginal adaptation (p = 0.058) or incisal internal adaptation (p = 0.076). The control group had significantly lower values for middle internal adaptation (p = 0.023) and cervical internal adaptation (p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Guided preparation evaluation showed no significant differences in marginal or incisal internal adaptation. The CAD/CAM group had significantly lower middle and cervical internal adaptation values.

Effect of supramucosal height of a scan body and implant angulation on the accuracy of intraoral scanning: An in vitro study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Intraoral scanners (IOSs) provide a digital alternative to conventional implant impression techniques. However, the effect of the supramucosal height of the scan body and implant angulation on the accuracy of IOSs remains unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to measure the impact of the supramucosal height of the scan body and implant angulation on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of intraoral digital implant scans in partially edentulous models. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two maxillary partially edentulous casts with 4 implant analogs were fabricated, 1 with 4 parallel implants (P-groups) and 1 with 2 implants distally inclined 18 degrees (A-groups). An implant scan body was positioned on each implant analog (CARES RC Mono Scanbody). For each cast, 3 subgroups were determined based on the soft tissue moulage fabricated for each reference cast exposing 3 mm (P-3 and A-3 subgroups), 5 mm (P-5 and A-5 subgroups), and 7 mm (P-7 and A-7 subgroups) of the implant scan bodies. The 2 reference casts were registered by using a coordinate measurement machine and desktop scanner (7 Series Dental Wings) and then scanned using an IOS (TRIOS 4) (n=15). Linear and angular discrepancy values and root mean square (RMS) error values between the implant scan bodies measured on the reference and experimental scans were computed with an inspection software program (Geomagic). Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction were applied for planned comparisons (α=.05/9 ≈ .006). RESULTS: For linear discrepancies, statistically significant differences were found between groups P-3 and A-3 (P=.004) and between P-7 and A-7 (P=.005). For angular discrepancies, statistically significant differences were found between groups A-3 and A-5 (P=.002) and between P-7 and A-7 (P=.003). The RMS error analysis found no statistically significant differences among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Implant angulation of 18 degrees did not significantly affect the accuracy of the intraoral scans in terms of 6 of the 9 planned comparisons, although the angled groups had lower mean values. Also, the supramucosal height of the scan body did not significantly affect the accuracy of the intraoral scans in terms of 17 of the 18 planned comparisons. Results may vary with different implant scan body designs.

Accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery (S-CAIS) using CAD-CAM surgical templates fabricated from different additive manufacturing technologies.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Different 3D printers are available for guided implant surgery, but studies that evaluate their source of errors and their cost-effectiveness are lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of different 3-dimensional (3D) printed surgical templates made using different additive manufacturing technologies and to evaluate the effect of implant location on the accuracy of fully guided implant placement. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty partially edentulous maxillary typodonts with edentulous sites in the right second premolar (SP), right lateral incisor (LI), left central incisor (CI), and left first molar (FM) locations were scanned and printed from the standard tessellation language (STL) datasets. The study compared 5 groups for the fabrication of implant surgical templates: Varseo S-Bego (Bego), Polyjet-Stratasys (Poly), Low Force Stereolithography-FormLabs (LFS), P30+-Straumann (P30), and M2-Carbon (M2). After fully guided implant placement, the typodont was scanned, and the 3D implant positions were compared with the master model by superimposing the STL files. Descriptive statistics were calculated for groups and subgroups, and comparisons among the groups and subgroups were conducted via 2-way mixed analysis of variance, Tukey honest significant difference, and post hoc Bonferroni tests (α=.05). RESULTS: The results were site specific and not consistent within each group. For angle deviation, the within-group analysis for P30 demonstrated significantly lower values for implants positioned at site SP (1.4 ±0.8 degrees) than for sites LI (2.3 ±0.7 degrees; P=.001) and CI (2.3 ±0.8 degrees; P=.007). For 3D offset at base for implant CI, LFS was significantly higher than Bego (P=.002), Poly (P=.035), or M2 (P=.001); P30 was also significantly higher than Bego (P=.014) and M2 (P=.006). LFS had a significantly higher 3D offset at the tip than Bego (P=.001) and M2 (P=.022) for implant CI. CONCLUSIONS: The choice of 3D printer seemed to influence fully guided implant surgery in terms of the final implant position compared with initial implant planning. However, although statistically significant differences were present across groups, all additive manufacturing technologies were within clinically acceptable values.

Digital vs Conventional Full-Arch Implant Impressions: A Retrospective Analysis of 36 Edentulous Jaws.

PURPOSE: There is a paucity of comparative clinical studies assessing the accuracy of full-arch digital scans versus conventional implant impressions. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the three-dimensional (3D) deviations between full-arch digital scans and conventional implant impressions for edentulous maxillae and mandibles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-seven patients (36 edentulous jaws) were treated with one-piece, screw-retained implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses (IFCDPs). Twenty-one jaws were maxillary, and 15 were mandibular. Full-arch conventional impressions and intraoral digital scans with scan bodies and an intraoral scanner had been taken during the impression phase. Following verification of the conventional stone casts, the casts were digitized. The generated standard tessellation language (STL) files from both impression techniques were merged and analyzed with reverse engineering software. The primary aim was to evaluate the accuracy between conventional and digital full-arch scans, while the effect of the edentulous jaw in 3D accuracy was the secondary aim. RESULTS: The cumulative 3D (mean ± SD) deviations between virtual casts from intraoral full-arch digital scans and digitized stone casts generated from conventional implant impressions were found to be 88 ±24 µm. In the maxillary group, the mean ± SD 3D deviation was 85 ±25 µm, compared to 92 ±23 µm for the mandibular group (p = 0.444). CONCLUSION: The 3D implant deviations found between the full-arch digital and conventional impressions lie within the clinically acceptable threshold. No statistically significant difference was identified between maxillary and mandibular jaws in terms of 3D deviations.

A comparative retrospective study of different surgical guide designs for static computer-assisted implant surgery in posterior single edentulous sites.

AIM: The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the accuracy of static Computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) in posterior single edentulous patients using different surgical guide designs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven partially edentulous patients with a total of 54 implants were included in the study. Seventeen implants were included in Group 1-Unbounded Tooth-Mucosa Supported; 18 implants in Group 2-Unbounded Tooth Supported; and 19 implants in Group 3 (Control)-Bounded Tooth Supported. All partially edentulous patients were treated with fully guided implant surgery using the corresponding surgical guide. Discrepancies between the pre-planned and post-operative implant position were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean angular deviation ± standard deviation (SD) was 2.91 ± 1.56°, 3.33 ± 1.72° and 2.25 ± 1.13° for Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The mean ± SD 3D offset at base was 0.66 ± 0.29 mm, 0.77 ± 0.24 mm, and 0.49 ± 0.22 mm; and 3D offset at tip was 0.84 ± 0.45 mm, 1.07 ± 0.38 mm, and 0.75 ± 0.25 mm for Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. No statistically significant differences between groups were found for angular deviation. There were statistically significant differences between Groups 2 and 3 for 3D offset at base (p = .002) and 3D offset at tip (p = .010). CONCLUSIONS: Different surgical guide designs for posterior single edentulous areas appear to be associated with the accuracy level of sCAIS. In unbounded sites, having additional posterior attached soft tissue support is preferable.

Prosthesis accuracy of fit on 3D-printed casts versus stone casts: A comparative study in the anterior maxilla.

OBJECTIVE: To compare in vitro the accuracy of fit of a reference prosthesis seated on three-dimensional (3D) printed casts generated from digital implant scans vs stone casts made by conventional implant impressions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A partially edentulous maxillary master cast with two internal connection implants was generated, while a reference implant-supported prosthesis was fabricated. Conventional splinted open-tray impressions were taken to create stone casts (n = 10) (control group). A digital scan was taken of the master cast using a white light intraoral optical scanner (IOS) (TRIOS, 3Shape), and a Standard Tessellation Language (STL) file was obtained. Four 3D printers were used to print the casts (n = 10 from each 3D printer): Straumann® P30+, Varseo S, Form 3b+and M2 Carbon. Accuracy of fit of the reference prosthesis on all control and test casts was assessed using the screw resistance test and radiographic test. Additionally, all casts were digitized using the same IOS, and the STL files were superimposed to the master cast STL file (reference) to evaluate the 3D accuracy with inspection Geomagic Control software using the root-mean-square (RMS) error. RESULTS: The reference prosthesis presented with clinically acceptable fit on all casts. The highest median RMS error was found in the stone cast group (94.6 µm) while the lowest median was in the M2 Carbon group (46.9 µm). The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed a statistically significant difference between the groups (p < 0.001). For post hoc comparisons, Dunn's test with the Holm-Bonferroni correction resulted in a statistically significant difference in four tests, with M2 Carbon exhibiting lower RMS error than the stone cast (p < 0.001) and P30+ (p < 0.001) groups, Form 3b exhibiting lower RMS error than the stone cast (p < 0.001) group, and Varseo S exhibiting lower RMS error than the stone cast (p = 0.006) group. CONCLUSION: Using the screw-resistance test and radiographic assessment, the reference prosthesis fit presented with clinically acceptable accuracy of fit on all casts. Printed casts from 3 different printers demonstrated statistically significant lower 3D deviations than stone casts generated using a conventional implant impression for the present partially edentulous scenario with two implants, but this did not affect prosthesis fit. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Even though there were 3D deviations between the master cast and all control and test casts generated from conventional impressions and digital scans respectively, the reference prosthesis presented with accurate fit on all casts. This indicates that there is a threshold for clinically acceptable accuracy of fit and that 3D-printed casts may be used as definitive master casts to fabricate implant-supported fixed dental prostheses for the partially edentulous anterior maxilla.

Accuracy of Different Surgical Guide Designs for Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: An In Vitro Study.

The aims of this study were to evaluate the effect of (1) the different surgical guide designs and (2) implant placement location on the accuracy of fully guided implant placement in single edentulous sites using an in vitro study model. Forty-five partially edentulous models were scanned and divided into 3 groups: group 1, tooth-supported full-arch surgical guide; group 2, 3 different tooth-supported shortened surgical guides (SSGs); and group 3, tooth-supported full-arch surgical guide with a crossbar. All surgical guides were printed and used for fully guided implant placement. A total of 180 implants (60 per group) were placed, and scan bodies were positioned on all models, and postoperative surface scan files (STL) files were obtained. Superimposition of preoperative and postoperative STL files was performed, and the accuracy of implant position was evaluated. The interaction between group and implant location was statistically significant for angle, 3D offset at the base, and at the tip (P < .001). The post-hoc tests showed a statistically significantly higher deviation for group 2 compared to group 3 for all outcomes for implants #4 (P < .05) and #7 (P < .05). There was also a statistically significant difference in all outcomes between groups 1 and 3 for implant #7 (P < .05). All surgical guide designs presented satisfactory performance with clinically acceptable levels of deviation. However, SSGs presented higher accuracy for guided implant placement in a single-edentulous site, whereas a full-arch surgical guide with a crossbar presented superior outcomes when 2 or more guided implants were placed simultaneously.

An Esthetic Evaluation of Different Abutment Materials in the Anterior Maxilla: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Using a Crossover Design.

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of implant abutment material and soft tissue thickness on the peri-implant soft tissue color using spectrophotometry and to evaluate gingival esthetics and patient satisfaction with three different abutments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients with a missing maxillary tooth in the esthetic area received an endosseous implant using a two-stage protocol. Gray titanium, pink anodized titanium, and hybrid zirconia custom abutments were fabricated for each participant and inserted for one week with a cross-over design in a randomized manner. Color measurements were made using a spectrophotometer comparing midfacial peri-implant soft tissue and marginal gingiva of the contralateral tooth. CIE Lab color scale was used following the formula: ΔE = [(∆L)2 + (∆a)2 + (∆b)2 ]½ . PES scores were recorded, and patient satisfaction questionnaires were completed at each abutment change visit and at 1-year follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed using Friedman's test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction as well as the Mann-Whitney U test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Abutment material type significantly affected the ΔΕ values of the peri-implant mucosa when compared to the contralateral teeth. At baseline, the highest ΔΕ means ± standard deviation (SD) values were obtained with gray titanium (11.25 ± 2.98), followed by pink anodized titanium (9.90 ± 2.51), and zirconia abutments (6.46 ± 1.43). Differences were statistically significant irrespective of soft tissue thickness. The highest PES values were obtained with zirconia abutments (10.88 ± 0.88), followed by pink anodized titanium (10.12 ± 1.13) and the lowest with gray titanium (9.68 ± 1.41). PES differences were significant only for the thin soft tissue group. Regarding patient satisfaction, VAS scores for the pink anodized and zirconia hybrid abutment groups were higher than the gray titanium group for each question. CONCLUSION: The color difference between soft tissues around teeth and implants was significant in all groups regardless of tissue thickness. The hybrid zirconia abutments resulted in the least color difference, followed by pink anodized and gray titanium. Significantly different PES values were recorded only for the thin tissue group. There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between zirconia and pink anodized abutments at the 1-year follow up. Pink anodized abutments represent a good esthetic alternative to zirconia hybrid abutments especially in mechanically challenging situations.

Elevated Salivary Inflammatory Biomarkers are Associated with SARS-CoV-2 Infection Severity.

High levels of inflammatory cytokines in serum have been reported in patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. There is growing interest in recognizing the role of inflammatory biomarkers in saliva in diagnosing systemic diseases. This study assumed that estimating biomarkers in saliva samples from patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 would distinguish between mild and severe cases. Saliva was collected from 142 controls and 158 SARS-CoV-2 patients (mild 72 and severe 86) to measure interleukin-6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), and C-X-C motif chemokine ligand-10 (CXCL-10). IL-6 and CXCL-10 were significantly increased in patients with mild and severe SARS-CoV-2 infections. CRP was significantly increased only in severe SARS-CoV-2 cases. All biomarkers were significantly higher in severe cases than in mild cases (p < 0.001). Among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, men showed significantly higher CRP and CXCL-10 levels than females (p < 0.01 and 0.05, respectively). In addition, elderly patients (40-80 years) had significantly higher IL-6, CRP, and CXCL-10 (p < 0.001). Patients with diabetes and hypertension showed elevated IL-6, CRP, and CXCL-10 (p < 0.001). There was a significant positive correlation between IL-6, CRP, CXCL-10, and between age, IL-6, CRP, and CXCL-10. Saliva may have a future value in measuring the inflammatory biomarkers associated with the severity of SARS-CoV2 infection and therapeutic monitoring.

Direct-acting oral anti-coagulants in dental practice: A Retrospective Observational Study (Part 1).

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this retrospective observational study was to determine the incidence of direct-acting oral anti-coagulant (DOA) use in patients receiving invasive dental procedures. The secondary objective was to investigate the precautionary measures implemented and the post/intraoperative complications associated with DOA use. METHODS: Electronic record database, Axium, was retrospectively reviewed, and patients using NGOA and treated between 2010 and 2017 were identified. Charts of patients who underwent invasive dental procedures were further reviewed to investigate the preoperative/intraoperative precautionary measures taken and identify any intraoperative/postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 130 patients were identified, with their annual number steadily rising from 12 in 2011 to 52 in 2016. Among those, 64 patients (49.23%) underwent invasive dental procedures. Pretreatment medical consults were obtained in all patients undergoing invasive procedures; however, only 7 (10.94%) were instructed to discontinue their DOA. Preoperative laboratory testing was obtained for two patients. Intraoperatively, 34 (53.13%) cases of excessive bleeding were reported, all were locally controlled with hemostatic agents. Only 4 instances of postoperative complications were documented. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the rise in the use of DOA, there is no consistent pattern for preoperative laboratory testing and DOA discontinuations. Expert consensus may be of great importance to develop practice guidelines.

Biaxial flexural strength of various CAD-CAM glass-ceramic materials.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the flexural strength of three CAD-CAM glass-ceramic materials and to investigate the effect of various surface treatments on their flexural strength. METHODS: 120 rectangular specimens were fabricated from three different types of CAD-CAM ceramic blocks and were divided into three groups: zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (Celtra Duo, Group 1), leucite-reinforced glass-ceramic (IPS Empress CAD, Group 2), and lithium disilicate ceramic (IPS e.max CAD, Group 3). Dimensions of the specimens were standardized to 14.5x12.5 mm and 1.5 mm thickness. Specimens in each group were randomized into four subgroups. The first subgroup (NS) did not undergo any surface treatment; the second subgroup (P) underwent polishing only; the third subgroup (G) underwent glazing only; and the fourth subgroup (PG) underwent both polishing and glazing surface treatments. Biaxial flexural strength (FS) testing was performed until fracture occurred; FS was calculated in MPa. All analyses were performed using SPSS version 24. RESULTS: Group NS2 showed the lowest FS (89.34 ± 25.30 MPa). Group PG3 showed a significantly higher FS (365.38 ± 52.52 MPa) than Group P3 (268.15 ± 48.34). There was a statistically significant difference among the material groups for each surface treatment: IPS e.max CAD showed the highest FS, which was significantly greater than that of both Celtra Duo and IPS Empress CAD. The combination of polishing and glazing surface treatment resulted in significantly higher flexural strength than polishing alone for all three materials tested. For each material, no significant difference was found between the following surface treatments: control and polishing-only surface treatments; glazing-alone and the combination of polishing and glazing surface treatments. For each surface treatment, Celtra Duo showed significantly lower flexural strength than IPS e.max CAD. However, it displayed higher flexural strength than IPS Empress CAD, although the difference was only significant for glazing and the combination of polishing and glazing. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study provides the clinician with an estimate of the flexural strength of glass-ceramic materials and shows how various surface treatments affect their strength.

Comparative analysis of dimensional alterations following extraction of maxillary molars using three-dimensional images' superimposition: a CBCT study.

The aims of this study were to (i) evaluate the bone alterations following maxillary molar extraction and (ii) identify the factors associated with bone alterations using a tomographic analysis. Cone Beam Computer Tomographies (CBCTs) of 17 subjects with 25 maxillary molars were analyzed, before and, in average, 12 months following extraction. Fifty CBCTs were segmented as 3D models that were used as reference for analysis. Cross-sectional planes were established to measure the dimensional changes in the vertical, horizontal aspects, and the area of the alveolar bone. Associations between root divergence, initial bone location related to the maxillary sinus, and the thickness of buccal and palatal bone at baseline was assessed using mixed-effect models. Overall, the average reduction in vertical bone height was 35.23% (2.61 ± 1.76 mm). The mean reduction of area of alveolar process and horizontal bone width were 18.89% (56.08 ± 44.23 mm2) and 65.10% (8.33 ± 4.51 mm), respectively. There was a marginal significant association between horizontal bone changes and the thickness of palatal bone (p = 0.05). The results of the present study indicated that following maxillary molar extraction, significant dimensional changes occur in both the vertical and horizontal directions. The vertical changes were mainly attributed to remodeling on the coronal aspect of the alveolar ridge and sinus pneumatization was rare.

Influence of zirconia crown artifacts on cone beam computed tomography scans and image superimposition of tomographic image and tooth surface scan: An in vitro study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Zirconia restorations create significant artifacts on 3D cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging. Static computer-assisted implant surgery (s-CAIS) relies on the accuracy of superimposition between an intraoral surface scan and CBCT imaging. However, how the artifacts from zirconia on the tomographic image might affect the predictability of s-CAIS is unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of zirconia crown restorations on the superimposition process for s-CAIS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four stone casts generated 4 groups: a control group (CG) with no crowns and 3 experimental groups with 4 (TG4), 7 (TG7), and 13 (TG13) zirconia crowns. A total of 40 CBCT scans were made for the 4 groups (n=10). All CBCTs were imported into a computer planning software program, and the casts from all 4 groups were scanned by using a high-resolution laboratory scanner. The standard tessellation language (STL) files were imported, segmented, and the 3 files superimposed for all groups. The accuracy of the superimposition was assessed, in millimeters, in 3 planes corresponding to anterior-posterior, horizontal, and vertical, as well as the overall measurement, and the results were analyzed statistically (α=.05). RESULTS: The overall analysis demonstrated statistically significant differences between all groups (P<.001), except between CG and TG4. The anterior-posterior dimension demonstrated significant differences between CG and TG7 (P<.001), CG and TG13 (P<.001), TG4 and TG7 (P=.004), and TG4 and TG13 (P=.001). For the vertical dimension analysis, significant differences were found between CG and TG7 (P=.001), CG and TG13 (P<.001), and TG4 and TG13 (P<.001). For the horizontal variable, statistically significant differences were found between CG and TG7 (P=.049), CG and TG13 (P<.001), TG4 and TG13 (P<.001), and TG7 and TG13 (P=.003). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of the superimposition of the images was influenced by the number of zirconia crowns, with an increased number reducing the superimposition accuracy.

Accuracy of 3D Printed Implant Casts Versus Stone Casts: A Comparative Study in the Anterior Maxilla.

PURPOSE: To conduct an in vitro comparison of the amount of three-dimensional (3D) deviation of 3D printed casts generated from digital implant impressions with an intraoral scanner (IOS) to stone casts made of conventional impressions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A maxillary master cast with partially edentulous anterior area was fabricated with two internal connection implants (Regular CrossFit, Straumann). Stone casts (n = 10) that served as a control were fabricated with the splinted open-tray impression technique. Twenty digital impressions were made using a white light IOS (TRIOS, 3shape) and the Standard Tesselation Language (STL) files obtained were saved. Based on the STL files, a digital light processing (DLP) and a stereolithographic (SLA) 3D printer (Varseo S and Form 2) were used to print casts (n = 10 from each 3D printer). The master cast and all casts generated from each group were digitized using the same IOS. The STL files obtained were superimposed on the master cast STL file (reference) to evaluate the amount of 3D deviation with inspection software using the root mean square value (RMS). The independent-samples Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn's test with Bonferroni correction (for post hoc comparisons) were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: The Varseo S group had the lowest median RMS value [77.5 µm (IQR = 91.4-135.4)], followed closely by the Conventional group [77.7 µm (IQR = 61.5-93.4)]. The Form 2 had the highest mean value [98.8 µm (IQR = 57.6-87.9)]. The independent-samples Kruskal-Wallis test revealed a significant difference between the groups (p = 0.018). Post hoc testing revealed a significant difference between Varseo S and Form 2 (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: The casts generated from the Varseo S 3D printer had better 3D accuracy than did those from the Form 2 3D printer. Both the Varseo S group and the conventional stone casts groups had similar 3D accuracy.

Digital workflow: In vitro accuracy of 3D printed casts generated from complete-arch digital implant scans.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Data on the accuracy of printed casts from complete-arch digital implant scans are lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the 3D accuracy of printed casts from a complete-arch digital implant intraoral scan with stone casts from conventional impressions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An edentulous mandibular cast with 4 multiunit abutments with adequate anteroposterior spread was used as the master cast. Digital scans (n=25) were made by using a white light intraoral scanner (IOS). The generated standard tessellation language (STL) data sets were imported into a computer-assisted design (CAD) software program to generate complete-arch implant casts through 3D printing technology. The 25 printed casts and the mandibular master cast were further digitized by using a laboratory reference scanner (Activity 880; Smart Optics). These STL data sets were superimposed on the digitized master cast in a metrology software program (Geomagic Control X) for virtual analysis. The root mean square (RMS) error and the average offset were measured. RESULTS: When compared with the master cast, the printed casts had a mean ±standard deviation RMS error of 59 ±16 µm (95% CI: 53, 66). The maximum RMS error reached 98 µm. The average offsets were all negative, with a significant difference compared with zero (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The implant 3D deviations of the printed casts from complete-arch digital scans had statistically significant differences compared with those of the master cast but may still be within the acceptable range for clinical application.

Accuracy of Guided Implant Surgery in 25 Edentulous Arches: A Laboratory Observational Study.

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of template-guided implant surgery for edentulous arches. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The stone master casts of 25 edentulous arches treated with either 4 or 6 implants with CBCT generated template-guided surgery were included in this observational cohort study. The stone casts generated from the surgical templates (group one) prior to implant placement were digitized into Standard Tesselation (STL) files with a reference scanner. For comparison, the stone master casts derived from intraoral complete-arch impressions after implant placement (group two) were also digitized. The resultant STL files were superimposed and best-fit-alignment algorithm was used to quantify the 3D deviations present between the two groups. Descriptive statistics were computed for all categorical variables. Due to the presence of nonindependent samples between maxillary and mandibular casts, a mixed-effects model was used. RESULTS: Deviations between the implant analogs of the stone casts representing digitally planned versus actually placed implants were found. The mean root-mean-square error (RMSE) between all 25 arches was found to be 0.2 mm (SD ± 0.15). The mean RMSE between presurgical and postsurgical maxillary stone casts were 0.19 ± 0.15 mm, while between mandibular stone casts were 0.21 ± 0.16 mm and were not significant (p = 0.67). The mean RMSE between presurgical and postsurgical stone casts arches with 4 versus 6 implants were found to be significant (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of the study and based on the amount of 3D deviations between the digitally planned implant positions and the actually placed implants, template-guided surgery is a safe treatment modality for implant placement in edentulous arches.