Intraoral ultrasonography image registration for evaluation of partial edentulous ridge: A methodology and validation study.

OBJECTIVES: Ultrasound (US) reveals details for diagnosing soft- and hard-tissue dimensions around teeth, implants, and the edentulous ridge, not seen in 2D radiographs. Co-registering free-hand US scans with other 3D modalities presents reliability challenges. This study first aims to develop and validate a registration method to longitudinally reproduce US images of the jawbone on a simulator. In addition, it also evaluates the degree of the anatomical match in humans between US images acquired by the proposed registration method and the commonly used freehand acquisitions in comparison to cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and intra-oral optical scan (IOS), used as references. METHODS: A previously introduced ultrasound phantom was employed as a CBCT-US hybrid, suitable for training and technique development of US guides in edentulous ridges. After establishing feasibility in the phantom, the methodology was validated in a cohort of 24 human subjects (26 cases). Soft tissues were delineated on US and IOS, and hard tissues on US and CBCT. US accuracy and repeatability from both guided and freehand scans (non-guided) was assessed as the average distance between US and the references. RESULTS: Guided US images resembled the references more closely than freehand (non-guided) scans. Notably, delineation of soft and hard tissues was significantly more accurate when employing guides. In the phantom, guided scans exhibited an absolute mean deviation of 81.8 µm for gingiva and 90.4 µm for bone, whereas non-guided scans showed deviations of 150.4 µm and 177.2 µm, respectively. Similarly, in vivo, guided US outperformed non-guided US, with gingiva deviations of 125 µm and 196 µm, and bone deviations of 354 µm and 554 µm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: By using a registration method, guided US scans improved repeatability and accuracy of mapping hard and soft tissue of the edentulous ridge when compared to non-guided scans. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This guided US imaging method could lay the foundation for longitudinal evaluation of tissue behavior and dimensional changes with improved accuracy.

The Scalloped Surgical Guide as an Alternative to Flat Bone Reduction Guide in Full-Arch Implant Restoration.

The goal of this clinical report was to present an alternative to traditional flat bone reduction guides, using a custom-designed 3-dimensional (3D)-printed guide according to the future gingival margin of the planned dentition. A 61-year-old woman with concerns regarding her smile appearance was presented. The initial examination revealed excessive gingival show accompanied by excessive overjet. The dentition was in a failing situation. The proposed treatment plan, relying on the sufficient amount of bone and keratinized tissue, consisted of recontouring of the alveolar ridge and gingiva and placement of 6 implants and an FP-1 prosthesis after extraction of all remaining maxillary teeth. Digital smile design was completed, and a fully digitally guided surgery was planned. This consisted of using 3 surgical guides, starting with the fixation pin guide, continuing with the scalloped hard- and soft-tissue reduction guide, and finally the implant placement template. Following the surgery, the patient received a temporary restoration, and on the 4-month follow-up, a new polymethyl meta-acrylate temporary prosthesis was delivered. The patient's 7-month follow-up is presented in the article. The report of this triple-template guided surgery indicated that digital 3D planning is a considerably predictable tool to properly establish and evaluate future occlusal plane, smile line, and lip support. Scalloped guides seem to be an excellent alternative to conventional bone reduction guides since they require less bone removal and improve patient comfort during surgery.

Influence of scanbody design and intraoral scanner on the trueness of complete arch implant digital impressions: An in vitro study.

This study aimed to compare the accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions using seven different scanbodies and four intraoral scanners. A 3D-printed maxillary model with six implants and their respective multi-unit abutments was used for this study. Seven scanbodies (SB1, SB2, SB3, SB4, SB5, SB6, and SB7) and four intraoral scanners (Primescan®, Omnican®, Trios 3®, and Trios 4®) were assessed. Each combination group was scanned ten times and a dental lab scanner (D2000, 3Shape) was used as a reference. All scans were exported as STL files, imported into Convince software (3Shape) for alignment, and later into Blender software, where their 3D positions were analyzed using a Python script. The 3D deviation, angular deviation, and linear distance between implants #3 and #14 were also measured. Accuracy was measured in terms of "trueness" (scanbody 3D deviation between intraoral scan and desktop scan). Kruskal-Wallis followed by the Bonferroni correction was used to analyze the data (⍺ = .05). The study found statistically significant differences in digital impression accuracy among the scanners and scanbodies (p<0.001). When comparing different intraoral scanners, the Primescan system showed the smallest 3D deviation (median 110.59 µm) and differed statistically from the others, while Trios 4 (median 122.35 µm) and Trios 3 (median 130.62 µm) did not differ from each other (p = .284). No differences were found in the linear distance between implants #3 and #14 between Trios 4, Primescan, and Trios 3 systems. When comparing different scanbodies, the lowest median values for 3D deviation were obtained by SB2 (72.27µm) and SB7 (93.31µm), and they did not differ from each other (p = .116). The implant scanbody and intraoral scanner influenced the accuracy of digital impressions on completely edentulous arches.

Erratum: Sleeveless guided implant placement compared to conventional approaches: An in vitro study at healed sites and fresh extraction sockets.

The following amendments are made to the published article: Int J Oral Implantol (Berl) 2023;16(2): 117-132; First published 9 May 2023.

Digitally Guided Lateral Sinus Floor Elevation With Simultaneous Implant Placement: 3 Case Reports With Technical Considerations.

A sinus floor elevation via lateral window (LSFE) is one of the most widely used bone augmentation procedures for implant therapy in the posterior area of the maxilla. Locating and preparing a correct opening window on the lateral sinus wall is a key step of this procedure. Conventionally, the surgeon designs and locates the window after the flap is reflected based on the information obtained from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images or other diagnostic aids. Nevertheless, in spite of the advancements in CBCT imaging, clinicians may still experience hardships in situating and procuring meticulous access to the maxillary sinus by using CBCT alone. Therefore, in cases requiring an LSFE simultaneous to implant placement, a maxillary sinus surgical guide has been tested and reported to be the amiable method to be utilized as a conjunct to prevent unpredictable consequences according to its application in implying both the direction for the implant and the location of the lateral window. This article presents 3 clinical cases with a fully digital approach to guide the opening of the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus as well as the simultaneous placement of a single implant in an ideal 3D position. Based on the CBCT images and intraoral scan, a surgical guide was fabricated based on 3D software. During surgery, this teeth-supported template can be placed intraorally, guiding sinus window opening preparation. This technique makes the sinus window opening procedure simple and predictable, reduces surgical time and the risk of complications, and allows the placement of the implant in the ideal 3D position.

Volumetric Outcomes of Peri-implant Soft Tissue Augmentation with a Xenogeneic Cross-Linked Collagen Scaffold: A Comparative Clinical Study.

Performing soft tissue augmentation (STA) at implant sites to improve esthetics, patient satisfaction, and peri-implant health is common. Several soft tissue grafting materials can be used to increase soft tissue thickness at the second-stage surgery, including human dermal matrices and xenogeneic collagen scaffolds. This study assessed and compared the volumetric outcomes, from second-stage surgery to crown delivery, around implants that received STA with a xenogeneic cross-linked collagen scaffold (XCCS) vs nonaugmented implant sites. Thirty-one patients (31 implant sites) completed the study. Intraoral digital scans were taken at the second stage and prior to crown delivery, and the STL files were imported in an image-analysis software to assess volumetric changes. XCCS-augmented implants showed significantly greater volumetric changes compared to control sites, which showed volume loss. The mean thickness of the XCCS-augmented area was 0.73 mm. There was no difference in patient-reported esthetic evaluations between groups. STA with XCCS provided significantly greater volumetric outcomes compared to nonaugmented sites. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term behavior of the augmented peri-implant mucosa and the effects of STA on peri-implant health.

Digitally-Guided Lateral Sinus Floor Elevation with Simultaneous Implant Placement: Three Case Reports with Technical Considerations.

INTRODUCTION: A sinus floor elevation via lateral window (LSFE) is one of the most widely used bone augmentation procedures for implant therapy in the posterior area of the maxilla.  Locating and preparing a correct opening window on the lateral sinus wall is a key step of this procedure. Conventionally, the surgeon design and locate the window after the flap is reflected based upon the information obtained from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images or other diagnostic aids. Nevertheless, in spite of the advancements in CBCT imaging, clinicians may still experience hardship in situating and procuring meticulous access to the maxillary sinus by using CBCT alone. Therefore, in cases requiring a LSFE simultaneous to implant placement, a maxillary sinus surgical guide (MSSG) has been tested and reported to be the amiable method to be utilized as a conjunct, to prevent unpredictable consequences according to its application in implying both the direction for the implant and the location of the lateral window. CASE SERIES: This article presents 3 clinical cases with a fully digital approach to guide the opening of the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus, as well as the simultaneous placement of a single implant in an ideal 3D position. Based on the CBCT images and intraoral scan, a surgical guide was fabricated base on 3D software. During the surgery, this teeth-supported template can be placed intraorally, guiding sinus window opening preparation. CONCLUSION: This technique makes the sinus window opening procedure simple and predictable, reduces surgical time as well as the risk of complications, and allows the placement of the implant in the ideal 3D position.

Sleeveless guided implant placement compared to conventional approaches: An in vitro study at healed sites and fresh extraction sockets.

PURPOSE: To investigate the accuracy of a novel sleeveless implant surgical guide by comparing it with a conventional closed-sleeve guide and a freehand approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Custom resin maxillary casts with corticocancellous compartments were used (n = 30). Seven implant sites were present per maxillary cast, corresponding to healed (right and left first premolars, left second premolar and first molar) and extraction sites (right canine and central incisors). The casts were assigned into three groups: freehand (FH), conventional closed-sleeve guide (CG) and surgical guide (SG) groups. Each group comprised 10 casts and 70 implant sites (30 extraction sites and 40 healed sites). Digital planning was used to design 3D printed conventional and surgical guide templates. The primary study outcome was implant deviation. RESULTS: At extraction sites, the largest difference between groups occurred in angular deviation, where the SG group (3.80 ± 1.67 degrees) exhibited ~1.6 times smaller deviation relative to the FH group (6.02 ± 3.44 degrees; P = 0.004). The CG group (0.69 ± 0.40 mm) exhibited smaller coronal horizontal deviation compared to the SG group (1.08 ± 0.54 mm; P = 0.005). For healed sites, the largest difference occurred for angular deviation, where the SG group (2.31 ± 1.30 degrees) exhibited 1.9 times smaller deviation relative to the CG group (4.42 ± 1.51 degrees; P < 0.001), and 1.7 times smaller deviation relative to the FH group (3.84 ± 2.14 degrees). Significant differences were found for all parameters except depth and coronal horizontal deviation. For the guided groups, there were fewer significant differences between healed and immediate sites compared to the FH group. CONCLUSION: The novel sleeveless surgical guide showed similar accuracy to the conventional closed-sleeve guide.

Digital planning for two-implant-supported overdenture and bone reduction guide using cone-beam computed tomography: Simple features for predictable outcomes.

The two-implant-supported mandibular overdenture is considered a reliable treatment option to restore masticatory function. Digital planning has been shown to improve the precision and accuracy of the surgical procedure. The outcomes are indeed pertinent to the ideal three-dimentional positioning of the implant placement. Recently, the uses of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and intraoral scan have improved greatly the workflow of digital planning; however, the sophisticated technology caused confusion among clinicians. The purpose of this case series was to exhibit the efficacy of a bone-supported guide in applying simultaneous implant placement and bone reduction, solely based on CBCT data. The bone reduction can therefore be determined accordingly, by adding windows to the guide, allowing the clinician to decide the amount of bone reduction as well as the location for implant placement. This novel surgical guide would not only fit properly on the bone but also provide the benefits of less-invasive surgery and the opportunity to place implants parallel. The  digital workflow described not only simplifies the fabrication process but also yields predictable surgical outcomes.

Fracture Load of Monolithic CAD/CAM Ceramic Crowns Placed on Different Implant Abutments.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the fracture load of monolithic, single-tooth implant-supported crowns cemented on solid or Ti-base (Variobase C) abutments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Besides abutment types (solid and Ti-base abutments), two ceramic systems (IPS e.max CAD and Zirconia inCoris ZI) and two occlusal thicknesses (0.5 and 1.5 mm) were also investigated in this study. In total, eight groups (n = 8) with 64 maxillary second premolar crowns were fabricated. All the crowns were cemented with resin cement, and the screw accesses in Ti-base groups were sealed with composite resin. After mechanical cycling, the specimens were submitted to fracture load test with the maximum force recorded in Newtons (N). Three-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc test were used for statistical analyses (α = .05). RESULTS: Both the abutment type (P = .0001) and the ceramic system (P = .0001) significantly affected the results. Screw-access channels reduced the fracture load of crowns by half compared to those cemented on solid abutments. The 1.5-mm and 0.5-mm zirconia crowns placed on solid abutments had similar highest fracture loads, while the e.max CAD groups positioned on Ti-base abutments showed significantly lower values compared with other groups. CONCLUSION: The screw access reduces the resistance of crowns supported by Ti-base abutments compared to crowns cemented on solid abutments. The inCoris ZI showed a higher fracture load than the IPS e.max CAD regardless of the abutment type and thickness.

Open-sleeve templates for computer-assisted implant surgery at healed or extraction sockets: An in vitro comparison to closed-sleeve guided system and free-hand approach.

OBJECTIVE: A buccal opening guide provides better view and better irrigation. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of this open-sleeve system. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty duplicated maxillary models, each with six extraction sockets and four healed sites, were used. Based on the same digital plan, three modalities, sCAIS with open-sleeves, closed-sleeves, and free-hand approach, were used to place implants. The global, horizontal, depth, and angular deviations between the virtual and actual implant positions were measured. RESULTS: Both sCAIS groups exhibited better accuracy than the free-hand group in two clinical scenarios. At healed sites, the closed-sleeve group showed a significantly fewer error than the open-sleeve group in global apical (0.68 ± 0.33 vs. 0.96 ± 0.49 mm), horizontal coronal (0.28 ± 0.15 vs. 0.44 ± 0.25 mm), horizontal apical (0.64 ± 0.32 vs. 0.94 ± 0.48 mm), and angular deviations (1.83 ± 0.95 vs. 2.86 ± 1.46°). For extraction sockets, the open-sleeve group exhibited fewer deviations than the closed-sleeve group in terms of global (coronal: 0.77 ± 0.29 vs. 0.91 ± 0.22 mm; apical: 1.08 ± 0.49 vs. 1.37 ± 0.52 mm) and horizontal (coronal: 0.60 ± 0.24 vs. 0.86 ± 0.20 mm; apical: 0.95 ± 0.50 vs. 1.32 ± 0.51 mm) deviations. However, the closed-sleeve group was more accurate in the depth control (0.26 ± 0.20 vs. 0.40 ± 0.31 mm). CONCLUSION: In this in vitro investigation, open-sleeve sCAIS proved better accuracy than free-hand surgery for both delayed and immediate implant placement. Compared with a closed-sleeve sCAIS system, open sleeve have the potential of providing better outcomes in extraction sockets but not in healed sites.

Does guided level (fully or partially) influence implant placement accuracy at post-extraction sockets and healed sites? An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of guide level on the accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS) at post-extraction sockets and healed sites. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 30 duplicate dental models, with 300 potential implant sites, were used. All the models were equally randomized into three groups: fully guided (FG, n = 100), partially guided (PG, n = 100), and free handed (FH, n = 100) surgeries. After implant placement, the mean global, horizontal, depth, and angular deviations between the virtually planned and actual implant positions were measured automatically by a Python script within software Blender. RESULTS: Both FG and PG surgeries showed significantly higher accuracy than FH surgery at post-extraction sockets and healed sites. In both sCAIS groups, there were nearly 50% more deviations from implants placed at sockets than those from delayed placement. For the immediate implant placement, the accuracy of sCAIS was significantly affected by the level of guidance. The FG group exhibited lower deviations than the PG group, with a significant difference in coronal global and horizontal deviations (p < .05). For the healed sites, two guided groups exhibited similar outcomes (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: sCAISs provide more accuracy than the free-handed approach in position transferring from planning to a model simulation. Full guidance can significantly increase the accuracy, especially at post-extraction sites. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Guided protocols showed significantly higher accuracy than free-handed surgery regardless of implantation timing, but both had nearly 50% more deviations in immediate implant placement.

The Impact of Surgical Guide Fixation and Implant Location on Accuracy of Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) for tooth-supported free-end dental implantation with the aid/and without the aid of fixation pins to secure the surgical template through comparison between planned, 3D printed guide position and placement implant position. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two duplicated maxillary resin models were used in the present in vitro study. Digital planning was performed and fabrication of a surgical template that allowed implant placement on the distal extension edentulous site of the model (maxillary left side). A first optical scan was performed after fitting the surgical template on the model to assess the deviation at the surgical guide level. After placing implants in the model using the surgical guide, scan bodies were attached to the implants, and a second scan was performed to record the position of placed implants. The digital representations were later superimposed to the pre-operative scan and measurements of implant deviations were performed. Global (coronal and apical), horizontal (coronal and apical), depth and angular deviations were recorded between planned implant position, guide position, and placement implant position. Three-way ANOVA was used to compare implant location (#13, 14, and 15), fixation pin (with or without pin), and guide comparison (planned, guided, and placement). RESULTS: Final implant placement based on the digital plan and based on the 3D printed guide were very similar except for depth deviation. Use of fixation pin had a statistically significant effect on the depth and angular deviation. Overall, without fixation pins and based on guide versus placement, mean global coronal (0.88 ± 0.36 mm), horizontal coronal (0.55 ± 0.32 mm), and apical (1.44 ± 0.75 mm), and angular deviations (4.28 ± 2.01°) were similar to deviations with fixation pins: mean global coronal (0.88 ± 0.36 mm); horizontal coronal (0.67 ± 0.22 mm) and apical (1.60 ± 0.69 mm); and angular deviations (4.53 ± 2.04°). Horizontal apical without pins (1.63 ± 0.69 mm) and with fixation pins (1.72 ± 0.70 mm) was statistically significant (p = 0.044). Depth deviation without pins (-0.5 ± 0.5 mm) and with fixation pins (-0.16 ± 0.62 mm) was also statistically significant (p = 0.005). Further analysis demonstrated that the final sleeve position on the 3D printed guide was on average 0.5 mm more coronal than the digital plan. CONCLUSIONS: The use of surgical guides with or without fixation pins can provide clinically acceptable outcomes in terms of accuracy in implant position. There was a statistically significant difference in the accuracy of implant position when utilizing fixation pins only for horizontal apical and depth deviation. Additionally, a statistically significant difference between the planned and the 3D printed surgical guide when considering the sleeve position was detected.

Early soft tissue changes following implant placement with or without soft tissue augmentation using a xenogeneic cross-link collagen scaffold: A volumetric comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: Soft tissue augmentation (STA) at implant sites has the potential of improving peri-implant health, esthetics, and marginal bone level stability. The present study aimed at evaluating the volumetric changes occurring following implant placement in sites that received STA compared to non-augmented sites. METHODS: A total of 26 subjects received a dental implant in a posterior edentulous site. Simultaneous STA with a xenogeneic cross-linked collagen scaffold was performed for the first 13 patients, while the remaining subjects served as the negative control. An intraoral optical scanner was used at baseline and at 12 weeks to generate digital models. RESULTS: The mean volume (Vol) gain of the test group was 38.43 mm3 , while a mean Vol of -16.82 mm3 was observed for the control group (p < 0.05). The mean thickness of the reconstructed volume (ΔD) was 0.61 and -0.24 mm, for the test and control group, respectively (p < 0.05). Higher linear dimensional changes were observed for the test group (p < 0.05), while no significant differences were observed in terms of keratinized mucosa width and pocket depth changes between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous STA with xenogeneic collagen scaffold obtained statistically significant higher volumetric outcomes compared to the non-augmented group. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: STA at the time of implant placement using a xenogeneic cross-linked collagen scaffold can prevent remodeling of the ridge during the first 12 weeks, as compared to non-grafted implant sites.

A fully digital approach for implant fixed complete dentures: A case report.

INTRODUCTIONS: Intraoral scanner has been widely used for implant impression in partially edentulous cases; however, its accuracy in the impression of full-arch implant is still questionable. CLINICAL REPORT: This clinical report presents a technique to check the accuracy of intraoral scanning for complete-arch implant restorations using an implant index cast (The Glossary of Prosthodontic Terms 9th Edition) and a three-dimensional printed cast. A clinical case of immediate loading on a maxillary edentulous patient illustrates the application of an implant index cast in implant fixed complete dentures (IFCDs). DISCUSSION: The implant index cast was fabricated based on the immediate interim prosthesis and provides effective control of the fit of scanned files and printed models. Therefore, this approach allows a more predictable and accurate fit of the final prosthesis. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In this article, we present a technique to check the accuracy of the final prosthesis without the need for a conventional impression and final cast in a digital workflow. This proposed approach is demonstrated through a case report of a maxillary edentulous patient restored with immediate loaded IFCDs.

Digital Immediate Complete Denture for a Patient with Rhabdomyosarcoma: A Clinical Report.

Fabricating an immediate complete denture can be very challenging in some clinical situations. This clinical report describes a digital workflow to fabricate a printed maxillary immediate complete denture for a patient with a severely compromised maxilla. Digital data obtained by using an intraoral scanner was utilized to reconstruct the three-dimensional (3D) image of the jaws at the desirable vertical dimension of occlusion. After performing the virtual teeth extraction and alveoloplasty, the denture base and teeth were designed. The resulting data were exported to a 3D printer for denture fabrication and the 3D printed (additively manufactured) denture was successfully inserted immediately after the surgery. After initial healing and confirmation of good retention and function, a new printed denture was fabricated by digitally duplicating the relined denture maintaining the same teeth positions but adjusting the base to a new intraoral scan of the healed ridge.