Influence of metal artefact reduction on the diagnosis of contact between implant and mandibular canal in cone beam computed tomography: An ex-vivo study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of metal artefact reduction (MAR) in the diagnosis of dental implant contact with the mandibular canal (MC) using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: Dental implants were installed with surgical guides in the posterior hemiarches of 10 dry human mandibles: 0.5 mm above to the MC cortex (G1/n = 8) and 0.5 mm inside the MC (G2/n = 10). The experimental set-up was scanned with two CBCT equipment using 85 kV and 90 kV, MAR ON or OFF, and different tube currents (4 mA, 8 mA and 10 mA). Two dentomaxillofacial radiologists (DMFRs) and two dentists (DDS) scored the relation between the dental implant and MC. Descriptive statistics were used to observe the absolute frequency of scores. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were calculated considering the known relation between the dental implant and the MC interior. McNemar's test (α = .05) was applied to compare the diagnostic efficacy of MAR ON versus MAR OFF. RESULTS: Overall specificity was higher than sensitivity for both DDS and DMFR (97% vs. 50% and 92.0% vs. 78.0% respectively). There was a significant effect of MAR (p = .031) for DMFR in the case of contact between the dental implant with the MC interior, in which sensitivity decreased with MAR activation from 90% to 40%. DMFR observers showed a better diagnostic performance compared with the DDS observers (accuracy of 84.0% and 71.0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Due to the limited efficacy of MAR, it should not be used when conducting CBCT scans for the evaluation of contact between the implant and the mandibular canal.

Digital photography vs. clinical assessment of resin composite restorations.

PURPOSE: To compare direct clinical and indirect digital photographic assessment of resin composite restorations. Ninety-two posterior resin composite restorations were classified using World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria by two different clinical examiners (C1 and C2). In the same appointment of clinical assessment, intraoral high-quality digital photographs were taken and posteriorly two different digital examiners (D1 and D2) classified the images of each restoration. Restorations of each patient were assessed once by C1 and C2 independently. D1 and D2 assessed the digital images from different locations and in different time. Data were analyzed using the Cohen's kappa coefficient, Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test and Dunn's multiple shared test, with 95% confidence. Agreement levels varied from very good (0.81-1.00) to fair (0.21-0.40). Statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) between assessments were found for surface lustre, staining, color match and translucency, esthetic anatomical form, fracture of material and retention and marginal adaptation. The classification of the resin composite restorations varied significantly according to clinical or high-quality digital photographic assessments. Overall, clinical assessment detected more demand for repair or replacement.

Do intraoral scanning technologies affect the trueness of dental arches with crowding, diastema, and edentulous spaces? A clinical perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the trueness of dental arches digitised by two intraoral scanning (IOS) technologies from patients presenting crowding, diastema, and bilateral posterior edentulous space with tilted molar. METHODS: Conventional impressions and dental stone models were generated from three patients presenting the aforementioned dental arch conditions. These models were digitised on a desktop scanner, and the resulting mesh was used as reference. Subsequently, the patients were scanned using confocal based (CF; iTero Element 2) and blue laser-multiscan (BLM; Virtuo Vivo) imaging IOS technology, totalling thirty scans. The meshes from the scans were exported in Standard Tessellation Language format and analysed using Geomagic Control X software. Root mean square (RMS) indicated deviation magnitude. Differences in IOS technologies were evaluated with paired t-tests, and dental arch conditions compared using ANOVA and post-hoc Tukey tests (α=0.05). RESULTS: Digital dental arch from blue laser-multiscan technology showed lower trueness compared to confocal based technology for crowding (p = 0.0084) and edentulous spaces (p = 0.0025) conditions. When the types of oral condition were compared, discrepancies were significantly different for both IOS technologies, featuring the arch with diastema showing the lowest trueness, followed by edentulous spaces and crowding. CONCLUSION: Dental arches presenting crowding and edentulous spaces digitised by blue laser-multiscan technology exhibited greater discrepancies compared to confocal based imaging technology. Furthermore, trueness varied among the dental arch conditions. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The IOS technology and patient's dental arch condition can influence the trueness of dental arch digitisation. Being aware of these effects allows clinicians to take them into account during scanning procedures, digital planning and manufacturing.

Comparison of intraoral scanning and CBCT to generate digital and 3D-printed casts by fused deposition modeling and digital light processing.

OBJECTIVES: to evaluate trueness and precision of digital casts from intraoral scanning (IOS) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT); trueness and precision of 3D-printed casts using digital light processing (DLP) and fused deposition modeling (FDM); the influence of digitizing method in the 3D-printed casts and, to compare STL data after DICOM segmentation and conversion. METHODS: a reference cast was digitized with IOS and CBCT, and 3D-printed using FDM and DLP. Linear measurements of occlusocervical (OC), interarch (IEA), and mesiodistal (MD) dimensions were taken on reference, digital and 3D-printed casts. Trueness was observed as the distortion, and precision was observed as the variation of measurements. One and Two-way ANOVA, Student t-test, and Chi-Square were applied to analyze data. RESULTS: distortion varied between digital casts for all dimensions; at OC, both showed expanded dimensions with IOS being significantly greater; in turn, CBCT digital casts showed higher distortion at IEA and MD. Dimensions of 3D-printed casts showed a predominance of shrinkage, DLP presented higher distortion compared to FDM for both digitizing methods. Digitizing methods influenced the 3D-printing of casts, especially for DLP. Regarding precision, no statistical difference was found. STL converted from DICOM showed statistical difference in IEA (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: digital casts showed distortion depending on the digitizing method. IOS was better in IEA and MD, and CBCT in OC dimensions. Overall, DLP casts presented higher distortion compared to FDM. The digitizing method influences trueness on 3D-printed casts. File conversion from DICOM to STL per se could change the dimension. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This investigation showed that digital casts from IOS and CBCT as well 3D-printed casts from FDM and DLP can show different trueness. It is clinically relevant as clinicians have various workflows available in Digital Dentistry which involve these digitizing and manufacturing methods.

Mechanical comparison of milled fiber-reinforced resin composite and Co-Cr frameworks with different connector cross-sectional geometries: An in vitro study.

This study compared the effect of using milled fiber-reinforced resin composite and Co-Cr (milled wax and lost-wax technique) frameworks for 4-unit implant-supported partial fixed dental prostheses; and also, evaluated the influence of the connector's cross-sectional geometries on the mechanical behavior. Three groups of milled fiber-reinforced resin composite (TRINIA) for 4-unit implant-supported frameworks (n = 10) with three connectors geometries (round, square, or trapezoid), and three groups of Co-Cr alloy frameworks manufactured by milled wax/lost wax and casting technique, were analyzed. The marginal adaptation was measured before cementation using an optical microscope. Then, the samples were cemented, thermomechanical cycled (load of 100 N/2 Hz, 106 cycles; 5, 37, and 55 ᵒC, a total of 926 cycles at each one), and cementation and flexure strength (maximum force) analyzed. Analysis of stress distribution in framework veneered considering resin and ceramic properties for fiber-reinforced and Co-Cr frameworks, respectively, implant, and bone was by finite element analysis under three contact points (100 N) on the central region. ANOVA and Multiple paired test-t with Bonferroni adjustment (α = 0.05) were used for data analysis. Fiber-reinforced frameworks showed better vertical adaptation (mean ranged from 26.24 to 81.48 µm) compared to the Co-Cr frameworks (mean ranged from 64.11 to 98.12 µm), contrary to horizontal adaptation (respectively, means ranged from 281.94 to 305.38 µm; and from 150.70 to 174.82 µm). There were no failures during the thermomechanical test. Cementation strength showed three times higher for Co-Cr compared to fiber-reinforced framework, as well as flexural strength (P < .001). Regarding stress distribution, fiber-reinforced had a pattern of concentration in the implant-abutment complex. There were no significant differences in stress values or changes observed among the different connector geometries or framework materials. Trapezoid connector geometry had a worse performance for marginal adaptation, cementation (fiber-reinforced 132.41 N; Co-Cr 255.68 N) and flexural strength (fiber-reinforced 222.57 N; Co-Cr 614.27 N). Although the fiber-reinforced framework showed lower cementation and flexural strength, considering the stress distribution values and absence of failures in the thermomechanical cycling test, it can be considered for use as a framework for 4-unit implant-supported partial fixed dental prostheses in the posterior mandible. Besides, results suggest that trapezoid connectors mechanical behavior did not perform well compared to round or square geometries.

Comparison between intraoral scanning and direct visual analysis for the assessment of developmental defects of enamel.

OBJECTIVE: To compare direct visual analysis (DVA) and intraoral scanning (IOS) for the assessment of developmental defects of the enamel (DDE). METHODS: Thirty-nine extracted permanent human teeth with DDE were selected by an experienced examiner and digitised using IOS. The scanning was recorded using the OBS Studio software parallel to the IOS software to obtain a coloured high-definition MP4 file of the process. Two other experienced, blinded, and calibrated examiners randomly analysed the same teeth through DVA and IOS. A third examiner resolved any disagreements between the two examiners. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the frequencies of the scores. Cohen's kappa test was used to determine whether the DVA scores were different from those assigned using IOS. Spearman's test was used to verify non-random examiner errors. The Chi-square test was used to compare score frequencies. Statistical significance was set at p <0.05. RESULTS: Scores indicating more severe and extended DDE (p <0.05) were more frequently assigned with IOS than with DVA (IOS: 25.64%, 25.64%, 38.46%, and 35.90% between one-third to two-third of the lingual, occlusal, mesial, and distal surfaces, respectively; vs. DVA: 10.26%, 7.69%, 15.38%, and 10.26% for the respective aforementioned tooth surfaces). Contrarily, 'no visible enamel defect' was significantly less assigned for IOS than for DVA (IOS: 15.38%, 43.59%, 35.90%, 15.38%, and 17.95% for buccal, lingual, occlusal, mesial, and distal surfaces, respectively; vs. DVA: 38.46%, 66.67%, 56.41%, 51.28%, and 43.59% for the respective aforementioned tooth surfaces). Kappa agreement ranged from fair to moderate when comparing DVA and IOS; the correlation between both methods was positive, indicating that the examiners assigned the scores properly and the differences arose from employing different methods. CONCLUSION: The assessment of DDE differed depending on the method used. IOS scores indicated more severe and extended DDE than DVA scores. Clinical investigation is the next step in validating the use of IOS for DDE diagnosis. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study showed that DDE can be assessed differently using IOS. It is clinically relevant as it directly affects the determination of the severity of the defect and dental treatment planning.

Clinical decision-making in anterior resin composite restorations: a multicenter evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated whether a sample of anterior resin composite restorations could be differently evaluated in different centers of evaluation by clinical and lay evaluators. METHODS: Anterior resin composite restorations on high-quality intraoral digital photography were evaluated using FDI criteria (1-5 score) by pairs of clinical and lay evaluators in Brazil (BR), France (FR), Peru (PE), and the United States of America (USA). Scores were allocated as maintenance (1, 2, 3), repair (4) and replacement (5) when comparing clinical evaluators and, as acceptable (1, 2, 3) and unacceptable (4, 5) when comparing clinical vs. lay evaluators and lay vs. lay evaluators. The Chi-square test compared the frequencies of scores among the centers. RESULTS: The frequencies of maintaining, repairing, or replacing anterior resin composite restorations given by clinical evaluators varied depending on the evaluation center. BR and PE showed the highest frequencies for repair and replacement, while FR and USA showed the highest frequencies for maintenance. The comparison of frequencies of anterior resin composite restorations accepted or unaccepted by the clinical vs lay evaluators in the same centers showed a significantly higher frequency of acceptable dental restorations coming from clinical evaluators. Comparison between lay evaluators from different centers showed significant higher frequency of unacceptable dental restorations by BR, compared to other centers. CONCLUSIONS: In the evaluation of anterior resin composite restorations, the maintenance, repair, or replacement trends can vary among different centers. The unacceptable rate came more frequently from lay than from clinical evaluators. Lay evaluators from different centers differed significantly. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinical and lay evaluators in distant evaluation centers can present different trends when assessing anterior resin composite restoration. Multicenter evaluations can help to understand such differences and it is important because clinical decision-making based on scientific evidence comes from clinical studies done in different research centers.