Clinical performance of single implant prostheses restored using titanium base abutments: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to evaluate the survival rates of restorations utilizing titanium base abutments (TBA) for restoring single-unit implant prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This review was conducted following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The focus question was: In patients who require the restoration of a single dental implant utilizing a titanium base abutment, what are the determining factors and outcomes relating to implant prosthesis prognosis and survival? A comprehensive search of databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library) was conducted on 16 April 2023 and updated on 5 May 2023. Randomized clinical trials (RCT), retrospective studies and prospective studies, reporting on the use of TBA for single implant prostheses, were reviewed. A Cochrane collaboration risk of bias assessment analysis was performed for randomized clinical studies, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale tool was applied for non-randomized studies. A meta-analysis was performed on clinical trials reporting on survival rates of both TBA and other abutments. Other clinical studies, reporting on TBA only, were included for descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The search provided 1159 titles after duplicates were removed. Six RCTs were included to perform a meta-analysis and compare the survival of the TBA to other abutments [OR 0.74; 95% CI: 0.21-2.63, heterogeneity; I2 0%; p = .99]. Twenty-three prospective and retrospective studies fulfilled the criteria and were included in the meta-analysis after 12 months of function. A total of 857 single implant-supported prostheses fabricated with a TBA were included. TBA abutments have an estimate 98.6% survival rate after 1 year in function (95% CI: 97.9%-99.4%). The mean follow-up period was 31.2 ± 16.9 months. CONCLUSIONS: Single implant prosthesis restored with titanium base abutments showed favourable short-term survival rates.

Three-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Clinical Trial on Screw-Retained Monolithic Zirconia Restorations on Ti-Base Abutments Based on Digital or Conventional Impression Techniques.

PURPOSE: To report on the follow-up of two previously published RCTs on the performance of screw-retained monolithic zirconia restorations on titanium (ti)-base abutments based on either digital scans through intraoral optical scanning (IOS) or conventional impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 54 patients receiving 89 restorations (44 solitary crowns [SC], 21 splinted crowns [2-FDP], and 24 three-unit fixed partial dentures [3-FDP]) were included for the 1- to 3-year follow-up period. Restoration survival and technical complications were documented. RESULTS: In total, 50 patients with 84 restorations completed the 3-year follow-up. One 3-FDP from the digital group was lost. This resulted in a survival rate of 97.9% for the digital group and 100% for the conventional group and an overall survival rate of 98.8% for screw-retained monolithic zirconia restorations on implants after 3 years. There was no statistically significant survival difference between the digital and conventional restorations (P = .362). When evaluated separately, a 100% survival rate of SCs and 97.7% for 2-FDPs could be reported. One decementation and three screw loosenings occurred in the 1- to 3-year follow-up. The multiple-implant restorations showed higher (23.3%) complication rates at the restoration level than the SCs (4.9%) after 3 years of function (P = .026). CONCLUSIONS: Screw-retained monolithic zirconia restorations on ti-base abutments show promising survival rates after 3 years of function. Restorative complications in screw-retained monolithic zirconia restorations on Ti-base abutments are more likely to happen in the first year of function and are more common in multiple-implant restorations than SCs. The impression type (digital or conventional) does not seem to influence these results.

Randomized Clinical Trial comparing clinical adjustment times of CAD/CAM screw-retained posterior crowns on ti-base abutments created with digital or conventional impressions. One-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to compare the required time of potential clinical adjustments of posterior screw-retained monolithic zirconia implant retained crowns based on intraoral optical scanning (IOS) or conventional impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with posterior tissue level implants (Straumann RN) replacing solitary teeth were recruited. Of all patients, impressions were taken with both an IOS (3M™ TDS) and a conventional (polyether) pick-up impression. Randomization was performed after impression taking and patients were to receive either a crown based on the digital or the conventional impression. The time required for adjustments at placement was recorded. Additionally, restoration survival and mechanical complications with a follow-up of one year were documented. RESULTS: Thirty two patients with 45 implants were included: 23 restorations in the test (IOS) and 22 in the control (conventional) group. The average adjustment time was 3.35 min (SD ± 3.38, range: 0-11 min) for the digital versus 6.09 min (SD ± 4.63, range: 0-18 min) for the conventional impressions (p = .039). A proper fit (no adjustments required) was achieved 39,1% in the digital and 18,2% conventional group respectively. All 45 restorations could be placed within the two planned appointments and only two minor mechanical complications occurred during the first year of function. CONCLUSIONS: The use of IOS resulted in shorter adjustment times at try-in than conventional impressions for solitary CAD/CAM implant restorations. Screw-retained solitary monolithic zirconia restorations on ti-base abutments show low complication- and survival rates in the short term.

A Randomized Clinical Trial comparing the clinical fit of CAD/CAM monolithic zirconia Fixed Dental Prostheses (FDP) on ti-base abutments based on digital or conventional impression techniques. One year follow-up.

PURPOSE: To compare the fit and clinical performance of screw-retained monolithic zirconia implant fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) based on either intraoral optical scanning (IOS) or conventional impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with two posterior tissue-level implants (Straumann Regular Neck) replacing two or three adjacent teeth were recruited. Impressions were taken with both IOS (True Definition Scanner, 3M ESPE) and a conventional (polyether) pick-up impression. Double-blind randomization was performed after impression-taking, and patients were to receive an FDP based on either the digital or the conventional impression. The fit was evaluated, and the time required for adjustments was recorded. Additionally, survival and technical complication rates with a follow-up of 1 year were documented. RESULTS: A total of 38 patients requiring 45 FDPs were included: 24 FDPs in the test (IOS) and 21 in the control (conventional) group. The average adjustment time was 6.92 minutes (SD: ± 10.84, range: 0 to 49 minutes) for digital vs 12.38 minutes (SD: ± 14.52, range: 0 to 54 minutes) for conventional impressions (P = .090). A proper fit (no adjustments) was achieved in 33.3% of the digital and 28.6% of the conventional group. Forty-two FDPs could be placed within the two planned appointments, and 3 FDPs exhibited an unacceptable fit and required an extra appointment. Eight technical complications occurred during the first year of function. The overall restoration survival rate was 100%. CONCLUSION: The clinical fit of CAD/CAM FDPs based on digital impressions is comparable to conventional impressions. Screw-retained monolithic zirconia FDPs on Ti-base abutments show low major complication and survival rates in the short term.

The accuracy of computer-guided implant surgery with tooth-supported, digitally designed drill guides based on CBCT and intraoral scanning. A prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this prospective cohort study was to evaluate computer-guided implant surgery with tooth-supported drill guides based on CBCT scans and intraoral scanning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For partially edentulous patients, a prosthetic and surgical planning was completed in the guided surgery software (coDiagnostiX) and drill guides were 3D-printed accordingly. Three months after implant placement, an intraoral scan of the implant's position was used to evaluate the accuracy of placement using the coDiagnostiX treatment evaluation tool. Deviations were reported in degrees and in distance at implant's entry point and apex. Several risk factors, which might influence the accuracy, were evaluated separately: treated jaw, flap design, prior augmentations, amount of unrestored teeth, crowding, location of implants, cortical interference, and implant's length and diameter. RESULTS: A total of 66 patients received 145 Straumann tissue level implants that were eligible for accuracy analysis. The mean angular deviation was 2.72° ± 1.42. The mean three-dimensional deviation at the implant's entry point was 0.75 mm ± 0.34. At implant's apex, the mean was 1.06 mm ± 0.44. The amount of unrestored teeth (p = .002 & p = .003), the implant's location (p < .001), the implant's length (p = .004), and cortical interference (p = .033) had a significant influence on the accuracy of placement. Implant survival was 99.3% (n = 1 failed implant) at 12 and 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Guided surgery with tooth-supported drill guides made in a digital workflow is a feasible treatment option. However, deviations do occur and the implant's length, location, cortical interference and the amount of unrestored teeth have a significant influence on the accuracy.

Group 5 ITI Consensus Report: Digital technologies.

OBJECTIVES: Working Group 5 was assigned the task to review the current knowledge in the area of digital technologies. Focused questions on accuracy of linear measurements when using CBCT, digital vs. conventional implant planning, using digital vs. conventional impressions and assessing the accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS) and patient-related outcome measurements when using s-CAIS were addressed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The literature was systematically searched, and in total, 232 articles were selected and critically reviewed following PRISMA guidelines. Four systematic reviews were produced in the four subject areas and amply discussed in the group. After emendation, they were presented to the plenary where after further modification, they were accepted. RESULTS: Static computer-aided surgery (s-CAIS), in terms of pain & discomfort, economics and intraoperative complications, is beneficial compared with conventional implant surgery. When using s-CAIS in partially edentulous cases, a higher level of accuracy can be achieved when compared to fully edentulous cases. When using an intraoral scanner in edentulous cases, the results are dependent on the protocol that has been followed. The accuracy of measurements on CBCT scans is software dependent. CONCLUSIONS: Because the precision intraoral scans and of measurements on CBCT scans and is not high enough to allow for the required accuracy, s-CAIS should be considered as an additional tool for comprehensive diagnosis, treatment planning, and surgical procedures. Flapless s-CAIS can lead to implant placement outside of the zone of keratinized mucosa and thus must be executed with utmost care.

Static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS) analysing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), economics and surgical complications: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the scientific literature for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS). METHODS: A PICO strategy was executed using an electronic (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL), plus manual search up to 15-06-2017 focusing on clinical studies investigating s-CAIS with regard to patients' pain & discomfort, economics and/or intra-operative complications. Search strategy was assembled from multiple conjunctions of MeSH Terms and unspecific free-text words. Assessment of risk of bias in selected studies was made at a "trial level" applying the Cochrane Collaboration Tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Assessment Scale, respectively. RESULTS: The systematic search identified 112 titles. Seventy abstracts were screened, and 14 full texts were included for analysis. A total of 484 patients were treated with s-CAIS for placement of 2,510 implants. Due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, meta-analyses could not be performed. CONCLUSIONS: The number of identified studies investigating s-CAIS for PROMs was low. Scientifically proven recommendations for clinical routine cannot be given at this time; however, the number of clinical complications with s-CAIS seems to be negligible and comparable to conventional implant surgery. s-CAIS may offer a beneficial treatment option in edentulous cases if a flapless approach is applicable. Nevertheless, the economic effects in terms of time efficiency and treatment costs are unclear. Clinical investigations with well-designed RCTs investigating PROMs with standardized parameters are compellingly necessary for the field of s-CAIS.

Computer-assisted template-guided custom-designed 3D-printed implant placement with custom-designed 3D-printed surgical tooling: an in-vitro proof of a novel concept.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to introduce a new concept for computer-assisted template-guided placement of a custom 3D-designed/3D-printed implant with congruent custom 3D-designed/3D-printed surgical tooling and to test the feasibility and accuracy of this method in-vitro. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One partially edentulous human mandibular cadaver was scanned with a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) system and intra-oral scan system. The 3D data of this cadaver were imported in specialized software and used to analyse the region of a missing tooth. Based on the functional and anatomical parameters, an individual implant with congruent surgical tooling and surgical guided template was designed and 3D-printed. The guided osteotomy was performed, and the custom implant inserted. To evaluate the planned implant position in comparison with the placed implant position, the mandible with implant was scanned again with the CBCT system and software matching was applied to measure the accuracy of the procedure. RESULTS: The angular deflection with the planned implant position was 0.40°. When comparing the 3D positions of the shoulder, there is a deviation of 0.72 mm resulting in an apical deviation of 0.72 mm. CONCLUSION: With the use of currently available technology, it is very well feasible to create in a virtual simulation a custom implant with congruent custom surgical tooling and to transfer this to a clinical setting. However, further research on multiple levels is needed to explore this novel approach.

Registration of cone beam computed tomography data and intraoral surface scans - A prerequisite for guided implant surgery with CAD/CAM drilling guides.

OBJECTIVES: Guided implant surgery (GIS) is performed with drilling guides that are produced on the virtual tooth model using CAD/CAM technology. The prerequisite for this workflow is the alignment of patients cone beam computed tomography CBCT and surface scan (registration). Dental restorations may cause deteriorating imaging artifacts in CBCT data, which in turn can have an impact on the registration process. The influence of the user and the preprocessing of data and of image artifacts on the registration accuracy were examined. MATERIAL AND METHODS: CBCT data and intraoral surface scans of 36 patients were used for virtual implant planning in coDiagnostiX (Dentalwings, Montreal, Canada). CBCT data were reconstructed to a three-dimensional anatomical model with the default settings provided by the software and also manually by four different examiners. Subsequently, the CBCT and intraoral surface models were registered by each examiner with the help of anatomical landmarks. Patients' data were subdivided into four groups (A-D) according to the number of metallic restorations: A = 0-2 restorations, B = 3-5 restorations, C = 6-8 restorations and D > 8 restorations. After registration, the distances between CBCT and dental surface models were measured. Linear regression models were used to assess the influence of the segmentation, the examiner and to the number of restorations (P < 0.05). RESULTS: The deviations between surface scan and CBCT models accounted to 0.54 mm (mean). The mean deviations were 0.69 mm (max. 24.8 mm) and 0.4 mm (max. 9.1 mm) for default and manual segmentation, respectively. Mean deviations of 0.36 mm (Group A), 0.43 mm (Group B), 0.67 mm (Group C) and 1.01 mm (Group D) were recorded. The segmentation (P = 0.000), the user (P = 0.0052) and the number of restorations (P = 0.0337) had a significant influence on the registration accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The deviation between CBCT and surface scan model resulting from inaccurate registration is transferred to the surgical field and results in a deviation between the planned and actual implant position. The registration accuracy in commercial virtual implant planning software is significantly influenced by the preprocessing of imported data, by the user and by the number of restorations resulting in clinically non-acceptable deviations encoded in drilling guides.

A Novel Approach for Computer-Assisted Template-Guided Autotransplantation of Teeth With Custom 3D Designed/Printed Surgical Tooling. An Ex Vivo Proof of Concept.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to introduce a novel method for accurate autotransplantation with computer-assisted guided templates and assembled custom-designed surgical tooling and to test the feasibility and accuracy of this method ex vivo. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A partially edentulous human mandibular cadaver was scanned with a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) system and an intraoral scan system. The 3-dimensional (3D) data of this cadaver were imported into specialized software and used to analyze the region of the recipient site and the donor tooth was selected. Subsequently, congruent to the donor tooth, custom surgical tools and a surgical guided template were designed and 3D printed. The guided osteotomy was performed and the donor tooth was transplanted. To evaluate the planned position of the donor tooth in relation to the position of the transplanted donor tooth, the mandible with the transplanted donor tooth was rescanned with the CBCT system and software matching was applied to measure the accuracy of the procedure. RESULTS: The angular deflection of the transplanted donor tooth in relation to the planned donor tooth position was 3.1°. When comparing the 3D positions of the shoulder, there was a deviation of 1.25 mm and an apical deviation of 0.89 mm. CONCLUSION: With the use of currently available technology, it is feasible to accurately plan and create in a virtual simulation a donor tooth position with congruent custom surgical tools and to transfer this to a clinical setting with 3D printing. However, further research on multiple levels is needed to explore this novel approach.

Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To assess the literature on the accuracy and clinical performance of static computer-assisted implant surgery in implant dentistry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic and manual literature searches were applied to collect information about (1) the accuracy and (2) clinical performance of static computer-assisted implant systems. Meta-regression analysis was performed to summarize the accuracy studies. Failure/complication rates were investigated using a generalized linear mixed model for binary outcomes and a logit link to model implant failure rate. RESULTS: From 2,359 articles, 14 survival and 24 accuracy studies were included in this systematic review. Nine different static image guidance systems were involved. The meta-analysis of the accuracy (24 clinical and preclinical studies) revealed a total mean error of 1.12 mm (maximum of 4.5 mm) at the entry point measured in 1,530 implants and 1.39 mm at the apex (maximum of 7.1 mm) measured in 1,465 implants. For the 14 included survival studies (total of 1,941 implants) using static computer-assisted implant dentistry, the mean failure rate was 2.7% (0% to 10%) after an observation period of at least 12 months. In 36.4% of the treated cases, intraoperative or prosthetic complications were reported, which included: template fractures during the surgery, change of plan because of factors such as limited primary implant stability, need for additional grafting procedures, prosthetic screw loosening, prosthetic misfit, and prosthesis fracture. CONCLUSION: Different levels of quantity and quality of evidence were available for static computer-assisted implant placement, with tight-fitting high implant survival rates after only 12 months of observation in different indications achieving a variable level of accuracy. Future long-term clinical data are necessary to identify clinical indications; detect accuracy; assess risk; and justify additional radiation doses, effort, and costs associated with computer-assisted implant surgery.