Comparative Evaluation of Marginal Bone Levels, ISQ Trends, and Implant Survival Rates Between Conventional Drilling and Osteotome Technique Using Implants of Varied Lengths: A Split-Mouth Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: To assess marginal bone loss (MBL) and implant stability when implant site preparation is performed with conventional drilling and the osteotome technique in the posterior maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 30 patients (mean age: 46.97 + 7.48 years) receiving 60 implants were enrolled in this study. In each patient, implant site preparation was done using either conventional drilling (conventional group; n = 30) or the osteotome technique (osteotome group; n = 30). The implant sites were further divided into groups based on the implant length used (implant length < 10 mm, implant length ≥ 10 mm). Marginal bone levels and implant stability quotient (ISQ) values were evaluated at the time of crown insertion and 1 year later. Independent t test and paired t test were used for intergroup and intragroup comparison, respectively. RESULTS: The osteotome group showed statistically significant higher initial ISQ (ISQi) and final ISQ (ISQf) values (ISQi: 61 ± 3.6; ISQf: 64.08 ± 3.7) compared to the conventional group (ISQi: 58.01 ± 4.6; ISQf: 61.32 ± 4.8). Statistically significant higher mean MBL was noted in the conventional group (-0.33 ± 0.12 mm) compared to the osteotome group (-0.26 ± 0.10 mm). Higher MBL was noted in the osteotome group (-0.32 ± 0.09 mm) compared to the conventional group (-0.30 ± 0.14 mm) for implants shorter than 10 mm. For implants ≥ 10 mm in length, significantly higher MBL was noted in the conventional group (-0.37 ± 0.09 mm) compared to the osteotome group (-0.19 ± .06 mm). CONCLUSIONS: Osteotome technique could be used as an alternative to conventional drilling, especially when implants longer than 10 mm are planned in the posterior maxilla.

Evaluation of shear bond strength and translucency of zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate and lithium disilicate: An in vitro study.

Aim: To analyze the effect of various surface treatment protocols on shear bond strength between the ceramic and resin cement (RC) and influence of zirconia on the translucency of LD as compared to zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS). Setting and Design: In-Vitro Study. Materials and Methods: Specimens (14 mm × 12 mm × 2 mm) (n = 135) and (14 mm × 12 mm × 1 mm) (n = 45) of ZLS computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing glass ceramic block and LD were fabricated, respectively. All the ZLS specimens were crystallized and were tested for the translucency parameter and ceramic-resin shear bond strength. Two different types of surface treatment were used on the ZLS and LD samples. The specimens were treated using the hydrofluoric acid (HF) etching or air abrasion with diamond particles (DPs). The specimens were then bonded using self-adhesive RC to a composite disc of 10 mm and thermocycling was performed. A universal testing machine was used to evaluate ceramic-resin shear bond strength after 24 h. The translucency of the specimens was evaluated using the spectrophotometer by calculating the difference in color between the readings over a black background and a white background. Statistical Analysis Used: Data were statistically analyzed using the independent sample t-test and analysis of variance with Bonferroni's correction and comparison was made between the specimens. Results: Independent sample t-test demonstrated statistically significantly higher translucency for group ZLS (61.44 ± 22) as compared to group LD (20.16 ± 8.39) (P < 0.001). Group ZLS showed statistically significant higher shear bond strength when surface treatment using HF or air abrasion with synthetic DPs was performed as compared to untreated group (3.58 ± 0.45) (P < 0.001). Moreover, air abrasion group (16.79 ± 2.11 megapascal [MPa]) demonstrated statistically significant higher shear bond strength as compared to HF etched group (8.25 ± 0.30 MPa) (P < 0.001). Furthermore, statistically significant higher shear bond strength was noted when air abrasion was done for group ZLS (16.79 ± 2.11 MPa) as compared to group LD (10.82 ± 1.92 MPa) (P < 0.001). However, on surface treatment with HF, a statistically significantly lower shear bond strength was noted for group ZLS (8.25 ± 0.30 MPa) as compared to group LD (11.29 ± 0.58 MPa) (P = 0.001). Conclusion: ZLS demonstrated higher translucency compared to LD restorations. DP abrasion of ZLS is recommended to achieve higher shear bond strength between the ceramic and RC.

Evaluation of Oral Health-Related Quality of Life and Patient Satisfaction in Three-Implant-Retained Mandibular Overdentures: A Randomized Crossover Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: To assess oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and patient satisfaction with a three-implant-retained mandibular overdenture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized crossover clinical trial, 20 edentulous patients received a new set of conventional complete dentures (CDs; baseline). Subsequently, three implants were placed in the anterior mandible: two were placed in the canine regions bilaterally and one in the midline. After successful osseointegration, CDs were attached to the implants using resilient attachments. The overdenture was retained either by three implants (test group) or two implants (control group). The sequence of treatment was randomized such that each patient experienced both treatment options for 6 months each. OHRQoL was assessed at baseline and after 6 months of function for each treatment option using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Statistical analyses were performed using Friedman and Wilcoxon signed rank tests. RESULTS: CD resulted in significantly higher OHIP-14 and VAS scores (25.25 + 6.42, 8.55 + 1.73) compared to both the control group (11.15 + 5.39, 4 + 2; P < .001) and the test group (6.25 + 4.02, 2.06 + 1.48; P < .001). Similarly, significantly higher mean OHIP-14 and VAS scores were noted for the control group compared to the test group (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Overdentures retained by three implants resulted in better OHRQoL scores and higher patient satisfaction compared to overdentures retained by two implants and CDs. Int J Prosthodont 2023;36:554-56.

Do digital impressions have a greater accuracy for full-arch implant-supported reconstructions compared to conventional impressions? An in vitro study.

Aim: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of conventional implant impressions with digital impression techniques made using two different intraoral scanners. Setting and Design: In-Vitro study. Material and Methods: A scan of master cast containing four implants was made using two intraoral scanners: CEREC Primescan (Dentsply Sirona, USA) and 3Shape Trios (Copenhagen, Denmark) with PEEK scan bodies attached to the implants. Model was scanned ten times using different scanners. The accuracy of the chairside scanners was compared with highly accurate laboratory scanner. The scans were transferred into the software (Geomagic Control X 20, 3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA) for analysis. The linear deviations and the angular deviations between the scans (scan of each model made using high-definition scanner and the master model scan) were calculated to determine the accuracy. Trueness was used as a parameter to compare the accuracy of different scanners (comparing test and reference). Statistical Analysis: Analysis of variance was performed with Bonferroni's post hoc test for multiple group comparisons. Results: Distribution of the mean overall absolute linear deviation was significantly lower in the conventional impression group compared to the CEREC Primescan scanner group and 3Shape Trios group (P < 0.05 for both). Distribution of the mean overall absolute linear deviation was significantly lower in the CEREC Primescan scanner group compared to the 3Shape Trios group (P < 0.05). Distribution of the mean overall absolute angular deviation did not differ between the three groups (P > 0.05 for all). Conclusion: Conventional impressions showed significantly greater accuracy compared to the digital impressions made with both the above intraoral scanners for implant-supported restoration of an edentulous arch. In addition, the digital impressions with the CEREC Primescan scanner showed greater accuracy as compared to the 3Shape Trios scanner.

A Comparative Study on Simulated Chairside Grinding and Polishing of Monolithic Zirconia.

This study evaluated the effects of different simulated chairside grinding and polishing protocols on the physical and mechanical properties of surface roughness, hardness, and flexural strength of monolithic zirconia. Sintered monolithic zirconia specimens (15 mm × 3 mm × 3 mm) were abraded using three different burs: diamond bur, modified diamond bur (zirconia specified), and tungsten carbide bur, along with a group of unprepared specimens that served as a control group. The study was divided into two phases, Phase 1 and Phase 2. Surface roughness, surface hardness, and flexural strength were assessed before and after the grinding procedure to determine the 'best test group' in Phase 1. The best abrasive agent was selected for Phase 2 of the study. The specimens in Phase 2 underwent grinding with the best abrasive agent selected. Following the grinding, the specimens were then polished using commercially available diamond polishing paste, a porcelain polishing kit, and an indigenously developed low-temperature sintered zirconia slurry. The physical and mechanical properties were again assessed. Results were analyzed using one-way ANOVA test. Specimens were observed under scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) for their microstructure and crystalline phases, respectively. Grinding with diamond burs did not weaken zirconia (p > 0.05) but produced rougher surfaces than the control group (p < 0.05). Tungsten carbide burs did not significantly roughen the zirconia surface. However, specimens ground by tungsten carbide burs had a significantly reduced mean flexural strength (p < 0.05) and SEM revealed fine surface cracks. Phase transformation was not detected by XRD. Polishing with commercially available polishing agents, however, restored the surface roughness levels to the control group. Dental monolithic zirconia ground with tungsten carbide burs had a significantly reduced flexural strength and a smooth but defective surface. However, grinding with diamond burs roughened the zirconia surface. These defects may be reduced by polishing with commercially available polishing agents. The use of tungsten carbide burs for grinding dental zirconia should not be advocated. Grinding with diamond abrasives does not weaken zirconia but requires further polishing with commercially available polishing agents.