A guide for selecting the intraoral scan extension when fabricating tooth- and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses.

OBJECTIVES: To describe a new classification for intraoral scans based on the scan extension and to introduce a decision guideline to choose the scan extension for fabricating tooth- and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). OVERVIEW: Multiple operator- and patient-related factors have been identified that can decrease the scanning accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs), including scan extension. However, the decision criteria for selecting scan extension for fabricating tooth- and implant-supported restorations is unclear. Based on the extension of the intraoral digital scans, three types of scans can be defined: half-arch (anterior or posterior), extended half-arch, and complete-arch scan. Variables to consider when choosing the scan extension include the number and location of units being restored, as well as the extension and location of edentulous areas. Additionally, the accuracy of the virtual definitive cast and the accuracy of the maxillomandibular relationship captured by using IOSs should be differentiated. CONCLUSIONS: A decision tree for selecting the scan extension is presented. The decision is based on the number and location of units being restored, and the extension and location of edentulous areas. Intraoral scans with reduced scan extension are indicated when fabricating tooth- and implant-supported crowns or short-span fixed prostheses, when the patient does not have more than one missing tooth in the area of the dental arch included in the scan. For the remaining clinical conditions, complete-arch intraoral scans are recommended. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Scan extension is a clinician's decision that should be based on the number and location of units being restored and the extension and location of edentulous areas. Intraoral scans with a reduced scan extension is recommended, when possible.

An overview of the different digital facebow methods for transferring the maxillary cast into the virtual articulator.

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to classify the described digital facebow techniques for transferring the maxillary cast into the semi-adjustable virtual articulator based on the digital data acquisition technology used and to review the reported accuracy values of the different digital facebow methods described. OVERVIEW: Digital data acquisition technologies, including digital photographs, facial scanners, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging, and jaw tracking systems, can be used to transfer the maxillary cast into the virtual articulator. The reported techniques are reviewed, as well as the reported accuracy values of the different digital facebow methods. CONCLUSIONS: Digital photographs can be used to transfer the maxillary cast into the virtual articulator using the true horizontal reference plane, but limited studies have assessed the accuracy of this method. Facial scanning and CBCT techniques can be used to transfer the maxillary cast into the virtual articulator, in which the most frequently selected references planes are the Frankfort horizontal, axis orbital, and true horizontal planes. Studies analyzing the accuracy of the maxillary cast transfer by using facial scanning and CBCT techniques are restricted. Lastly, optical jaw trackers can be selected for transferring the maxillary cast into the virtual articulator by using the axis orbital or true horizontal planes, yet the accuracy of these systems is unknown. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Digital data acquisition technologies, including digital photographs, facial scanning methods, CBCTs, and optical jaw tracking systems, can be used to transfer the maxillary cast into the virtual articulator. Studies are needed to assess the accuracy of these digital data acquisition technologies for transferring the maxillary cast into the virtual articulator.

Altered reverse impression method involving extraoral digitalization of a verification jig for the fabrication of implant-supported prosthesis by using a complete-digital workflow.

The reverse impression method involves the extraoral digitalization of the interim implant-supported prostheses and intraoral digitalization of antagonist arch and maxillomandibular relationship. This technique allows the fabrication of implant-supported prostheses by using a complete-digital workflow. The scan analogs make the reverse impression method feasible. However, this method may not be recommended if the interim polymethyl methacrylate prosthesis does not have passive fit. The present manuscript describes an altered reverse impression technique that involves the extraoral digitalization of a conventional verification jig, which has attached scan analogs. With this technique modification, the implant positions captured using the verification jig are used to obtain the virtual definitive implant cast and fabricate the definitive implant-supported prosthesis.

An overview of artificial intelligence based applications for assisting digital data acquisition and implant planning procedures.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an overview of the current artificial intelligence (AI) based applications for assisting digital data acquisition and implant planning procedures. OVERVIEW: A review of the main AI-based applications integrated into digital data acquisitions technologies (facial scanners (FS), intraoral scanners (IOSs), cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) devices, and jaw trackers) and computer-aided static implant planning programs are provided. CONCLUSIONS: The main AI-based application integrated in some FS's programs involves the automatic alignment of facial and intraoral scans for virtual patient integration. The AI-based applications integrated into IOSs programs include scan cleaning, assist scanning, and automatic alignment between the implant scan body with its corresponding CAD object while scanning. The more frequently AI-based applications integrated into the programs of CBCT units involve positioning assistant, noise and artifacts reduction, structures identification and segmentation, airway analysis, and alignment of facial, intraoral, and CBCT scans. Some computer-aided static implant planning programs include patient's digital files, identification, labeling, and segmentation of anatomical structures, mandibular nerve tracing, automatic implant placement, and surgical implant guide design.

Cephalometric analysis performance discrepancy between orthodontists and an artificial intelligence model using lateral cephalometric radiographs.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the present clinical study was to compare the Ricketts and Steiner cephalometric analysis obtained by two experienced orthodontists and artificial intelligence (AI)-based software program and measure the orthodontist variability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 50 lateral cephalometric radiographs from 50 patients were obtained. Two groups were created depending on the operator performing the cephalometric analysis: orthodontists (Orthod group) and an AI software program (AI group). In the Orthod group, two independent experienced orthodontists performed the measurements by performing a manual identification of the cephalometric landmarks and a software program (NemoCeph; Nemotec) to calculate the measurements. In the AI group, an AI software program (CephX; ORCA Dental AI) was selected for both the automatic landmark identification and cephalometric measurements. The Ricketts and Steiner cephalometric analyses were assessed in both groups including a total of 24 measurements. The Shapiro-Wilk test showed that the data was normally distributed. The t-test was used to analyze the data (α = 0.05). RESULTS: The t-test analysis showed significant measurement discrepancies between the Orthod and AI group in seven of the 24 cephalometric parameters tested, namely the corpus length (p = 0.003), mandibular arc (p < 0.001), lower face height (p = 0.005), overjet (p = 0.019), and overbite (p = 0.022) in the Ricketts cephalometric analysis and occlusal to SN (p = 0.002) and GoGn-SN (p < 0.001) in the Steiner cephalometric analysis. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between both orthodontists of the Orthod group for each cephalometric measurement was calculated. CONCLUSIONS: Significant discrepancies were found in seven of the 24 cephalometric measurements tested between the orthodontists and the AI-based program assessed. The intra-operator reliability analysis showed reproducible measurements between both orthodontists, except for the corpus length measurement. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The artificial intelligence software program tested has the potential to automatically obtain cephalometric analysis using lateral cephalometric radiographs; however, additional studies are needed to further evaluate the accuracy of this AI-based system.

True horizontal or gravity plane for transferring the maxillary cast into the virtual articulator by using an optical jaw tracking system.

Different techniques of transferring the maxillary cast into the analog semi-adjustable articulator by using the true horizontal or gravity reference plane have been reported. However, procedures are required for recording this reference plane and transferring the maxillary cast into the virtual semi-adjustable articulator. In the present manuscript, a technique is described for registering the true horizontal or gravity plane in relationship to the natural head position of the patient by using an optical jaw tracking system. Additionally, the recorded true horizontal plane is used to transfer the maxillary cast into the virtual semi-adjustable articulator by using a dental computer-aided design program. This technique facilitates the maxillary cast transfer into the virtual articulator by using the true horizontal plane recorded with an optical jaw tracking system, maximizing the functionality of the optical jaw tracking device.

True horizontal or gravity plane registration for transferring the maxillary scan into the virtual articulator by using a facial scanner without the need for an additional device.

Different reference planes can be used to transfer the maxillary cast into the analog articulator, including the true horizontal or gravity reference plane. Different techniques have been described to record the gravity reference plane for transferring the maxillary scan into the virtual articulator by using facial scanning techniques. However, these digital facebow procedures require the use of an extraoral scan body system, printed reference device, or orientation reference board. This manuscript describes a technique for recording the gravity reference plane by using a facial scanner without the use of an additional device. This technique aims to reduce the clinical time needed to capture a patient's digital data and minimize the laboratory time needed to integrate the virtual patient and transfer the maxillary scan into the virtual articulator.

Intraoral scanners as tracking devices: A dental protocol for assessing volumetric changes between intraoral scans.

Intraoral scanners (IOSs) are digital data acquisition technologies that ease the recording of virtual diagnostic casts. Some IOSs have a specific software tool to assess volumetric changes between 2 scans acquired on the patient at different times. The scans are superimposed and volumetric differences between both meshes are reported. However, these software tools may be limited to scans captured only by the IOS of the same manufacturer. The present manuscript describes a protocol for comparing volumetric changes between 2 scans recorded using any IOS. Additionally, 1 of the scans is divided into 3 sections to minimize the alignment distortion and maximize the evaluation of the volumetric changes.

Implementing an optical jaw tracking system to locate centric occlusion: A dental technique.

Optical jaw tracking systems are designed to record the static maxillomandibular relationship and the mandibular motion of a patient, including excursive movements and mastication pattern. This digital data acquisition technology can be integrated into diagnostic and treatment planning procedures, as well as into designing dental prostheses. A step-by-step protocol to record a patient's digital data, including the repeatable reference position of the jaw or centric relation, by using an intraoral scanner, Kois deprogrammer, and optical jaw tracking system is described. The data are then processed in the software program of the jaw tracking system to locate centric occlusion.

Digital diagnostic occlusal equilibration combining an intraoral scanner, optical jaw tracking system, and dental design program: A dental technique.

Patients with aberrant occlusal patterns, including constricted mastication patterns or occlusal dysfunction, may require occlusal equilibration. Conventional diagnostic procedures involve diagnostic stone casts mounted in the articulator. During diagnostic procedures, occlusal equilibration methods are simulated on mounted stone casts to analyze the amount of dental structure that may need to be removed. A technique to virtually simulate an occlusal equilibration procedure is described. Digital data acquisition procedures include diagnostic casts acquired using an intraoral scanner and the repeatable reference position of the mandible or centric relation, excursive movements, and the mastication pattern captured using an optical jaw tracking system. The jaw tracker and dental design programs are used to simulate the occlusal equilibration.

Integrating the repeatable reference position and excursive movements of the mandible acquired using a jaw tracker into the design procedures of an occlusal device: A technique.

Jaw tracking systems can record mandibular movement such as the repeatable reference position and excursive movements of the mandible. A technique for integrating the recorded repeatable reference position of the mandible and excursive movements captured using an optical jaw tracking system into the design procedures of an occlusal device is described. The mandibular motion of the patient is directly used to design the occlusal device, replacing the virtual articulator. The described technique aims to reduce the delivery time by incorporating the recorded motion of the patient into the virtual design of the occlusal device.

Use of an optical jaw tracking system to capture the envelope of function when designing interim and definitive prostheses: A dental technique.

Jaw tracking systems can record mandibular motion for incorporation into programs used for designing dental prostheses. However, the protocol for data acquisition and design using the recorded mandibular motion is unclear. The envelope of function recorded in a patient with acceptable occlusal function provides important functional information that can be integrated into the design of dental prostheses. A protocol for recording a patient's digital data, including the envelope of function using a jaw tracker, for incorporation into the design procedures and a delivery protocol are described. This technique may simplify the delivery of prostheses by reducing the adjustments needed to the definitive prostheses.

Locating centric occlusion by using intraoral scanners and open access or dental computer-aided design programs: A dental technique.

When using conventional methods, centric occlusion (CO) can be determined on conventional gypsum casts that are mounted in an analog articulator at centric relation (CR). In the digital environment, intraoral scanners (IOSs) can be used to record maxillary and mandibular scans articulated in CR. However, a digital protocol to locate the CO on articulated intraoral digital scans at CR by using computer-aided design (CAD) programs is needed. The present manuscript describes a straightforward technique to record CR by combining an IOS and a Kois deprogrammer. Afterwards, the acquired digital data are imported into a CAD program to locate CO. The technique includes a complete digital protocol to locate CO by using 3 different CAD programs: open-access non-dental, open-access dental, and dental CAD program.

Accuracy of the maxillary cast transfer into the virtual semi-adjustable articulator by using analog and digital facebow record methods.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Different digital methods have been described for transferring the maxillary cast into a virtual articulator; however, its accuracy remains uncertain. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of the maxillary cast transfer into the virtual semi-adjustable articulator by using analog and digital methods. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A maxillary typodont with 5 markers was positioned into a mannequin, which was digitized by using an industrial scanner (ATOS Q) and an extraoral scan of the typodont obtained (T710). Three groups were created based on the technique used to transfer the maxillary cast into the virtual articulator (Panadent PCH Articulator): conventional facebow record (CNV group), digital photograph (P group), and facial scanning (FS group) (n=10). In the CNV group, conventional facebow records (Kois Dentofacial analyzer system) were digitized (T710) and used to mount the maxillary scan into the articulator by aligning it with the reference platform (Kois adjustable platform) (DentalCAD). In the P group, photographs with the reference glasses (Kois Reference Glasses 3.0) were positioned in the mannequin. Each photograph was superimposed with the maxillary scan. Then, the maxillary scan was transferred into the virtual articulator by using the true horizontal plane information of the photograph. In the FS group, facial scans with an extraoral scan body (Kois Scan Body) were positioned in the mannequin by using a facial scanner (Instarisa). The extraoral scan body was digitized by using the same extraoral scanner. The digitized extraoral scan body provided the true horizontal plane information that was used to mount the maxillary scan into the articulator, along with the Kois disposable tray of the scan body. On the reference scan and each specimen, 15 linear measurements between the markers of the maxillary scans and the horizontal plane of the virtual articulator and 3 linear measurements between the maxillary dental midline and articulator midline were calculated. The measurements of the reference scan were used as a control to assess trueness and precision. Trueness was analyzed by using 1-way ANOVA followed by the pairwise comparison Tukey tests (α=.05). Precision was evaluated by using the Levene and pairwise comparisons Wilcoxon Rank sum tests. RESULTS: No significant trueness (P=.996) or precision (P=.430) midline discrepancies were found. Significant posterior right (P<.001), anterior (P=.005), posterior left (P<.001), and overall (P<.001) trueness discrepancies were revealed among the groups. The P group obtained the best posterior right, posterior left, and overall trueness and precision. The P and FS groups demonstrated the best anterior trueness, but no anterior precision discrepancies were found. CONCLUSIONS: The techniques tested affected the accuracy of the maxillary cast transfer into the virtual semi-adjustable articulator. In the majority of the parameters assessed, the photography method tested showed the best trueness and precision values. However, the maxillary cast transfer accuracy ranged from 137 ±44 µm to 453 ±176 µm among the techniques tested.

Implant-supported prostheses following the biologically oriented preparation technique (BOPT) after implantoplasty procedures: A dental technique.

Esthetic concerns may appear on implant-supported prostheses after peri-implantitis treatment, such as implantoplasty procedures that includes the thread removal and surface smoothening. A technique for restoring implants that have been treated for peri-implantitis using an implantoplasty procedure combined with the detoxification of the implant surfaces is described. The technique involves the fabrication of an implant-supported prosthesis following the biologically oriented preparation technique (BOPT) and aims to solve esthetic complications after this peri-implantitis treatment approach.

Digital workflow for the fabrication of custom-fit additively manufactured sports mouthguards with balanced occlusion using an optical jaw tracking system: A dental technique.

Custom sports mouthguards are used in various sports to protect teeth, temporomandibular joints, and soft tissues from impact forces. The present article demonstrates a digital workflow to fabricate a 3-dimensionally (3D) printed individualized sports mouthguard. An optical jaw tracking system is used to record a repeatable reference position, and mandibular excursive movements to achieve a completely balanced occlusion. The technique simplifies the fabrication of a custom-fit mouthguard over the conventional approach by providing increased thickness accuracy, control of design, and integration of jaw motion.

Digital workflow to measure the mandibular range of motion using different jaw tracking technologies.

The analysis of the mandibular range of motion (ROM) includes the evaluation of maximum opening, deviation upon opening, and amplitude of the left and right excursive movements and protrusion. Conventionally, ROM assessment has been directly measured in the patient's mouth by using a ROM ruler. The development of jaw tracking systems, such as magnetometry and photometric devices, allows the digital assessment of the mandibular ROM. The present manuscript describes the clinical protocols for recording and measuring the mandibular ROM by using different jaw tracking systems.

Accuracy comparison of the maxillary cast transfer into the virtual semi-adjustable articulator between an analog facebow record and a digital photography technique.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Digital photographs can be used for transferring the maxillary cast into the virtual semi-adjustable articulator; however, its accuracy remains unknown. PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to compare the accuracy of the maxillary cast transfer into the virtual semi-adjustable articulator by using an analog and a digital standardized photography technique. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A maxillary cast was digitized (T710) and positioned into a dental mannequin. The dental midline was not coincident with the facial midline and the maxillary occlusal plane was tilted. A reference scan of the assembled mannequin was obtained by using a facial scanner (Instarisa). Two groups were created based on the technique used to transfer the maxillary cast into the articulator (Panadent PCH): conventional facebow record (CNV group) or digital photograph (Photo group) (n=10). In the CNV group, facebow records (Kois Dentofacial analyzer system) were digitized (T710) and used to transfer the maxillary scan into the articulator by aligning it with the reference platform (Kois adjustable platform). In the Photo group, photographs with a reference glasses (Kois Reference Glasses) positioned into the mannequin were acquired. Each photograph was aligned with the maxillary scan. Then, the maxillary scan was transferred into the articulator by using the true horizontal axis information contained in the photograph. On the reference scan and each specimen, 10 linear measurements between the buccal cusps of the maxillary scan and the horizontal plane of the virtual articulator and a linear measurement between the maxillary dental midline and articulator midline were calculated. The measurements of the reference scan were used as a control to compute trueness and precision. Trueness was analyzed by using 1-way ANOVA followed by the pairwise comparison Tukey test (α=.05). Precision was evaluated by using the Levene and Wilcoxon Rank sum tests (α=.05). RESULTS: The overall discrepancy measured in the CNV group was 0.620 ±0.396 mm, while in the Photo group it was 1.282 ±0.118 mm. Significant trueness differences were found in the midline (P=.037), anterior (P=.050), posterior right (P<.001), posterior left (P=.012), and overall discrepancy (P<.001) between the CNV and Photo groups. Significant precision discrepancies were found in the midline (P=.012), posterior right (P<.001), anterior (P<.001), posterior left (P=.002), and overall discrepancy (P<.001) between the CNV and Photo groups. CONCLUSIONS: The facebow record method impacted the accuracy of the maxillary cast transfer. The Photo group obtained better trueness in the midline transfer than the CNV group; however, the CNV group demonstrated better trueness in the anterior, posterior right, posterior left, and overall discrepancy of the maxillary cast transfer compared with the Photo group. Overall, the Photo group obtained better precision than the CNV group.

Influence of connected and nonconnected calibrated frameworks on the accuracy of complete arch implant scans obtained by using four intraoral scanners, a desktop scanner, and a photogrammetry system.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Different techniques have been proposed for increasing the accuracy of complete arch implant scans obtained by using intraoral scanners (IOSs), including a calibrated metal framework (IOSFix); however, its accuracy remains uncertain. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of complete arch scans obtained with connecting and non-connecting the implant scan bodies (ISBs) recorded using intraoral scanners (IOSs), a laboratory scanner (LBS), and photogrammetry (PG). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cast with 6 implant abutment analogs was obtained. Six groups were created: TRIOS 4, i700, iTero, CS3800, LBS, and PG groups. The IOSs and LBS groups were divided into 3 subgroups: nonconnected ISBs (ISB), splinted ISBs (SSB), and calibrated framework (CF), (n=15). For the ISB subgroups, an ISB was positioned on each implant abutment analog. For the SSB subgroups, a printed framework was used to connect the ISBs. For the CF subgroups, a calibrated framework (IOSFix) was used to connect the ISBs. For the PG group, scans were captured using a PG (PIC Camera). Implant positions of the reference cast were measured using a coordinate measurement machine, and Euclidean distances were used as a reference to calculate the discrepancies using the same distances obtained on each experimental scan. Wilcoxon squares 2-way ANOVA and pairwise multiple comparisons were used to analyze trueness (α=.05). The Levene test was used to analyze precision (α=.05). RESULTS: Linear and angular discrepancies were found among the groups (P<.001) and subgroups (P<.001). Linear (P=.008) and angular (P<.001) precision differences were found among the subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The digitizing method and technique impacted the trueness and precision of the implant scans. The photogrammetry and calibrated framework groups obtained the best accuracy. Except for TRIOS 4, the calibrated framework method improved the accuracy of the scans obtained by using the IOSs tested.

Influence of scan extension and starting quadrant on the accuracy of four intraoral scanners for fabricating tooth-supported crowns.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Multiple factors can influence the accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs). However, the impact of scan extension and starting quadrant on the accuracy of IOSs for fabricating tooth-supported crowns remains uncertain. PURPOSE: The purpose of the present in vitro study was to measure the influence of scan extension (half or complete arch scan) and the starting quadrant (same quadrant or contralateral quadrant of the location of the crown preparation) on the accuracy of four IOSs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A typodont with a crown preparation on the left first molar was digitized (T710) to obtain a reference scan. Four scanner groups were created: TRIOS 5, PrimeScan, i700, and iTero. Then, 3 subgroups were defined based on the scan extension and starting quadrant: half arch (HA subgroup), complete arch scan starting on the left quadrant (CA-same subgroup), and complete arch scan starting on the right quadrant (CA-contralateral subgroup), (n=15). The reference scan was used as a control to measure the root mean square (RMS) error discrepancies with each experimental scan on the tooth preparation, margin of the tooth preparation, and adjacent tooth areas. Two-way ANOVA and pairwise multiple comparisons were used to analyze trueness (α=.05). The Levene and pairwise comparisons using the Wilcoxon Rank sum tests were used to analyze precision (α=.05). RESULTS: For the tooth preparation analysis, significant trueness and precision differences were found among the groups (P<.001) and subgroups (P<.001), with a significant interaction group×subgroup (P=.002). The iTero and TRIOS5 groups obtained better trueness than the PrimeScan and i700 groups (P<.001). Moreover, half arch scans obtained the best trueness, while the CA-contralateral scans obtained the worst trueness (P<.001). The iTero group showed the worst precision among the IOSs tested. For the margin of the tooth preparation evaluation, significant trueness and precision differences were found among the groups (P<.001) and subgroups (P<.001), with a significant interaction group×subgroup (P=.005). The iTero group obtained best trueness (P<.001), but the worst precision (P<.001) among the IOSs tested. Half arch scans obtained the best trueness and precision values. For the adjacent tooth analysis, trueness and precision differences were found among the groups (P<.001) and subgroups tested (P<.001), with a significant interaction group×subgroup (P=.005). The TRIOS 5 obtained the best trueness and precision. Half arch scans obtained the best accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Scan extension and the starting quadrant impacted the scanning trueness and precision of the IOSs tested. Additionally, the IOSs showed varying scanning discrepancies depending on the scanning area assessed. Half arch scans presented the highest trueness and precision, and the complete arch scans in which the scan started in the contralateral quadrant of where the crown preparation was obtained the worst trueness and precision.