Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 59(11)2023 Nov 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38004086

RESUMEN

Background and Objectives: With the increased trend towards digitalization in dentistry, intraoral scanning has, to a certain extent, replaced conventional impressions in particular clinical settings. Trueness and precision are essential traits for optical impressions but have so far been incompletely explored. Materials and Methods: We performed a study to evaluate the differences in the three-dimensional spatial orientations of implant analogs on a stone cast when using an intraoral scanner compared to a dental laboratory scanner. We assessed the deviation of the intraoral scans compared to the laboratory scan for three standardized implant measurement plans and compared these results with control scans of the neighboring natural teeth. Results: We found no statistically significant correlation between the measurements at the scan body level and the landmarks chosen as controls on the neighboring natural teeth (p = 0.198). The values for the implant scans presented wider variation compared to the control scans. The difference between the implant and the control planes ranged from -0.018 mm to +0.267 mm, with a median of -0.011 mm (IQR: -0.001-0.031 mm). While most values fell within a clinically acceptable margin of error of 0.05 mm, 12.5% of the measurements fell outside of this acceptable range and could potentially affect the quality of the resulting prosthetic work. Conclusions: For single-unit implant-supported restorations, intraoral scanning might have enough accuracy. However, the differences that result when scanning with an intraoral scanner may affect the quality of prosthetic work on multiple implants, especially if they are screw-retained. Based on our results, we propose different adaptations of the prosthetic protocol to minimize the potential effect of errors that may occur during the digital workflow.


Asunto(s)
Implantes Dentales , Boca Edéntula , Humanos , Imagenología Tridimensional , Diseño Asistido por Computadora , Modelos Dentales
2.
BMC Infect Dis ; 16 Suppl 1: 94, 2016 03 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27169511

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The sinus lift was first described in 1974 and it has proven to be a predictable procedure ever since. The complications of this surgical procedure are reported in the literature to be low, and can include acute maxillary sinusitis, scattering of the grafting material into the sinus cavity, wound dehiscence and Schneiderian membrane perforations. We aimed to evaluate the rate of acute maxillary sinusitis after sinus lift procedures and the appropriate management strategies. METHODS: Between 2013 and 2015, 245 dental implants were placed in 116 patients (76 males and 40 females) with concomitant bone augmentation of the maxillary sinus floor. The sinus lifting procedure was bilateral in 35 patients and unilateral in 81 patients (a total of 151 sinuses). RESULTS: Maxillary sinusitis occurred in 5 patients (4.3 %). The clinical signs of infection were: headache, locoregional pain, cacosmia, inflammation of the oral buccal mucosa and rhinorrhea or unilateral nasal discharge. A mucosal fistula was observed during inspection in one patient. The management included only the removal of the grafting material in 3 patients, in 1 patient the grafting material was removed together with all the implants, and in 1 patient only 2 implants and the grafting material were removed, 1 implant being left in place. The sinus cavity was irrigated with metronidazole solution and antibiotic therapy with clindamycin and metronidazole was prescribed for 10 days. Subsequently, all signs of infection disappeared within 5 to 7 days and normal sinus function and drainage were restored. CONCLUSIONS: Although sinus lift is regarded as a safe and reliable procedure, acute sinusitis is a possible complication which has to be managed immediately in order to reduce the risk of further complications like pansinusitis, osteomyelitis of the maxillary bone, and spreading of the infection in the infratemporal space or orbital cavity. To minimize risk, caution must be taken with all the steps of the procedure, in order not to obliterate the ostium, impairing maxillary sinus clearance.


Asunto(s)
Trasplante Óseo , Implantes Dentales , Seno Maxilar/cirugía , Sinusitis Maxilar/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Implantación Dental Endoósea , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Sinusitis Maxilar/prevención & control , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Estudios Retrospectivos , Rumanía/epidemiología , Elevación del Piso del Seno Maxilar
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA