In vitro evaluation of bioburden, three-dimensional stability, and accuracy of surgical templates without metallic sleeves after routinely infection control activities.

BACKGROUND: Surgical templates are classified as noncritical devices, and they do not need to be sterile. AIM: Primary aim of this study was to assess the microbiological burden present on the surgical templates without metallic sleeves after disinfection. Furthermore, to evaluate trueness after disinfection and steam sterilization at 121°C/15 min, and over a 8-week storage period. Finally, to assess their accuracy after in vitro implant placement simulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty surgical templates were printed and divided in five groups of eight templates each. Groups A to C were disinfected with 0.5% Chlorhexidine Gluconate and 70% ethyl alcohol base solution for 15 min. Templates in the group D were steam sterilized at 121°C for 15 min, while, the templates in the group E were used as control. Implant simulation was performed in the group A. Outcome measures were determination of bioburden, trueness assessment using GOM Inspect Professional software, and accuracy evaluated thought the mean angular deviation of simulated implants. RESULTS: Total microbic charge measured as colony forming units (CFU) for sample, was 24.40 in the control group (group E; n = 8), and <4.40 in the test group (group C; n = 8), with a reduction of 84%. Colored representation from GOM inspection showed no differences after disinfection and implant simulation, disinfection alone, and steam sterilization, compared to the control group. A very small difference in the surface and volume dimensions was reported 1 month after templates fabrication. The mean roundness tolerances of the tested templates improved of 0.96 ± 0.56° (95% CI 0.57-1.35). CONCLUSION: Surgical templates without metallic sleeves can be safely used after disinfection, demonstrating high level of accuracy, even when the surgical procedures should be postponed within a couple of weeks. Further in vivo study are needed to confirm these preliminary results.

Feasibility of Using a Prosthetic-Based Impression Template to Improve the Trueness and Precision of a Complete Arch Digital Impression on Four and Six Implants: An In Vitro Study.

BACKGROUND: Intraoral scanners (IOSs) in implantology represent a viable approach for single teeth or partial arches. However, when used for complete edentulous arches or long-span edentulous areas, it has been demonstrated that there is a need for improvement of IOS-related techniques. Therefore, the aim of this in vitro study was to assess the trueness and precision of a complete arch digital impression on four and six implants taken with or without a customized, prosthetic-based impression template. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two experimental models were prepared, representative of a complete edentulous mandible restored with four and six implants with built-in scan abutments. Models were scanned with (test group, TG) or without (control group, CG) the prosthetic-based impression template. Eight scans were taken for each model. The time needed to take impressions, error, trueness, and precision were evaluated. A statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS: In the case of four implants, the time needed for the impression was 128.7 ± 55.3 s in the TG and 81.0 ± 23.5 s in the CG (p = 0.0416). With six scan abutments, the time was 197.5 ± 26.8 and 110.6 ± 25.2 s in the TG and CG, respectively (p = 0.0000). In the TG, no errors were experienced, while in the CG, 13 impressions were retaken due to incorrect stitching processes. In the four-implant impression, the mean angle deviation was 0.252 ± 0.068° (95% CI 0.021-0.115°) in the CG and 0.134 ± 0.053° (95% CI 0.016-0.090°) in the TG. The difference was statistically significant (p = 0.002). In the six-implant impression, the mean angle deviation was 0.373 ± 0.117° (95% CI 0.036-0.198°) in the CG and 0.100 ± 0.029° (95% CI 0.009-0.049°) in the TG (p = 0.000). In the TG, there were no statistically significant differences in the mean angle deviation within the group (p > 0.05), but there were in the CG. A colorimetric analysis showed higher deviations from the original model for the six-implant impression without a prosthetic template. CONCLUSIONS: Although all of the impressions exhibited deviation from the original model in the range of clinical acceptability, the prosthetic-based impression template significantly improved the trueness and precision of complete edentulous arches rehabilitated with four or six implants, making the complete arch digital impression more predictable.