Search

Objective: Complete arch implant rehabilitation necessitates meticulous treatment planning and high-level collaboration between surgical and prosthetic dental teams. Emerging virtual technologies hold considerable promise in streamlining this process. The aim of this article is to extend recommendations to clinicians venturing into the virtual patient-assisted esthetic implant rehabilitation workflow., Overview: This article summarizes recommendations for virtual patient-assisted esthetic implant rehabilitation in the following five aspects: three-dimensional data handling and superimposition, occlusion and virtual articulator integration in creating virtual patients, streamlined face- and prosthetic-driven surgical planning, reuse of presurgical data ("Copy & Paste"), and final impression for passive fitting of final restoration. To illustrate these principles, a case with complete-mouth implant rehabilitation completed within six visits using this virtual patient workflow is presented., Conclusion: The virtual patient workflow serves as an invaluable tool to perform treatment planning, enhance efficiency, and ensure predictable outcomes in esthetic complete arch implant rehabilitation., Clinical Significance: Virtual workflows are increasingly prevalent in esthetic implant rehabilitation. Nevertheless, these workflows necessitate a distinct set of knowledge and tools divergent from conventional dentistry practices. This article offers guidelines and recommendations for dental clinicians who are new to this field., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

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., Competing Interests: he authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Meneghetti et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

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.

This technique report describes a fully digital workflow to create a prosthetic articulator-based implant rehabilitation (PAIR) virtual patient for complete-arch or complete-mouth implant rehabilitation. This workflow uses a custom gothic arch tracer during the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan and a 3-dimensional virtual facebow when superimposing data. The PAIR virtual patient possesses reliable centric relation and vertical dimension of occlusion and is compatible with virtual articulators. Computer-aided implant planning and a digital prosthetic design can be seamlessly integrated by using this virtual patient., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.

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., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

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., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

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., (© 2021 by the American College of Prosthodontists.)

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., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

A fully digital workflow for generating a virtual patient for completely edentulous computer-aided implant surgery is described. Existing dentures are temporarily relined with a radiopaque dental silicone material, and a cone beam computed tomography scan is made with the relined denture inserted. Then, scans of the relined denture are made with an intraoral scanner. The radiopaque silicone material increases the stability of the dentures and allows the a cone beam computed tomography images and the scans of the dentures to be superimposed to create a virtual patient. This technique may reduce laboratory work steps, clinical chairside time, and treatment costs., (Copyright © 2020 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

To place implants with minimal trauma is what the patient and clinician are seeking. Hence, the aim of this study was to quantify the potential of using an implant fixture as a ridge expander in an underprepared osteotomy. Thirty-eight edentulous sites in 12 human cadaver jaws with ridge widths ranging from 4 to 6 mm and with type 3 or type 4 bone density were randomly assigned into 2 groups. In the ridge expansion group (RE), each osteotomy was drilled to a width of 2.8 mm and depth of 11.5 mm. In the non-ridge expansion (NE) control group, each osteotomy was drilled to a width of to 3.4 mm and depth of 11.5 mm. A 3.7 mm × 11.5 mm tapered implant was inserted into each site. The ridge width before (RW1) and after (RW2) implant placement as well as the buccal plate thickness (BPT) post-insertion were measured and analyzed. In the RE group, the average RW1 and RW2 were 4.69 ± 0.45 mm and 5.54 ± 0.35 mm, respectively, corresponding to a statistically significant ridge expansion of 0.85 mm (P < .01). In the NE group, no ridge width gain was observed (RW1: 4.79 ± 0.40 mm, RW2: 4.88 ± 0.42 mm). Compared to NE, RE resulted in a statistically greater BPT (1.08 ± 0.28 mm after RE vs 0.71 ± 0.37 mm after NE, P < .001). Our study determined that it was physically possible to widen a ridge by an average of 0.85 mm by osteotomy underprepation in ridge with type 3 or type 4 bone density, which effectively turned the implant upon insertion into a ridge expander. The physiological consequences of this method of ridge expansion in a living person must be established before drawing further conclusions about its clinical indications or efficacy.

Mounting dental casts in an articulator is an important prerequisite for prosthodontic rehabilitation cases where the design of an accurate static and dynamic occlusion is needed. Virtual mounting can be achieved through the superimposition of various 3D images acquired from the hard and soft tissues of the patient. The purpose of this technical report is to describe a digital cross-mounting technique for patients undergoing implant-supported fixed prosthetic treatment. Through the use of face scanning, intraoral scanning, and cone beam computed tomography, this technique enables creation of a 3D virtual patient with occlusal registration in centric relation. Ultimately, the described methodology allows for the fabrication of definitive full-mouth implant-supported fixed prostheses., (© 2020 by the American College of Prosthodontists.)

A fully digital workflow for designing and manufacturing a splinted framework and a custom tray for the impression of multiple implants placed with guided surgery is described. This digital workflow protocol does not require extra visits after surgery to prepare for the definitive impression because of the use of preoperative digital implant planning data. As a result, it helps reduce laboratory procedures, chairside time, and treatment cost., (Copyright © 2019 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The virtual patient, a unique computer simulation of the patient's face, teeth, oral mucosa, and bone, provides an extraordinary mechanism for digital dental implant surgery planning and prosthetic design. However, the seamless registration of digital scans with functional information in the context of a virtual articulator remains a challenge. This report describes the treatment of a 47-year-old male with full-mouth guided immediate implant placement and immediate loading of CAD/CAM interim prostheses. Utilizing a novel digital workflow, a multifactorial registration of the vertical dimension of occlusion, centric occlusion, and facebow record were completed digitally and paired within a digital articulator. Utilizing this innovative approach, a complex treatment plan and procedure was executed smoothly with a successful prosthetic outcome demonstrating good fit, occlusion, esthetics, and patient reported satisfaction., (© 2020 by the American College of Prosthodontists.)

Objective: To investigate the effect of open-flap or flapless approaches on the accuracy of implant placement partially guided by tooth-supported surgical templates., Materials and Methods: A total of 36 edentulous sites were selected from seven human cadaver heads. Following the preoperative implant planning using Blue Sky Plan, surgical guides were fabricated by an in-office desktop 3D printer. All the sites were randomly divided into two groups: flapless approach (n = 18), and open-flap approach (n = 18). After guided osteotomy preparation with subsequent freehand implant placement, digital intraoral scanning was performed to obtain post-operative implant positions. Based on the image registration, the deviations between the planned and actual implant position were measured and compared., Results: Statistically significant variance differences between the two approaches were found in the global coronal (open-flap: 0.86 ± 0.23 mm; flapless: 1.3 ± 0.62 mm; P < .001), global apical (open-flap: 1.38 ± 0.37 mm; flapless: 1.9 ± 0.78 mm; P = .002), and depth (open-flap: 0.59 ± 0.34 mm; flapless 0.89 ± 0.78 mm; P < .001) deviations. The differences were not significant regarding lateral (coronal and apical) and angular deviations., Conclusions: In semi-guided implant surgery, the open-flap and flapless approaches demonstrate similar lateral and angular deviations. The open-flap group shows better depth control when manually inserting the implant., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

In recent years, the implant-supported dentures have risen rapidly, and thus, more attention was paid to post-operative pain, following dental implantation. To explore risk factors and establish as well as validate a risk prediction model for moderate-to-severe post-operative pain following dental implantation. A observational study of 352 patients with 563 implants was carried out. The following candidate predictors were collected: age, gender, pain sensitivity, anxiety, pain expectation, operator experience, position, length and number of placed implants, duration of surgery and surgery procedures. The outcome was the presence of moderate-to-severe post-operative pain within the 24 hours post-surgery. Multivariate logistic regression in combination with bootstrapping techniques was used to explore independent risk factors and establish a prediction model. The mean pain intensity score was 4.21 within 24 hours post-operatively, while the incidence of moderate-to-severe pain was 61.9%. Independent risk factors of moderate-to-severe post-operative pain were flap surgery, surgical template, the interaction between anxiety state and pain sensitivity, the interaction between pain sensitivity and pain expectation and the interaction between implant length and immediate implant. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve was 0.72. The model's sensitivity was 75.7%, and the specificity was 64.2%. The model reliability was good (Nagelkerke's R 2 0.226). The risk factors and the prediction model (needs further improvement) can help dentists to identify patients at increased risk of moderate-to-severe post-operative pain following dental implantation., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Statement of Problem: Whether abutment height can influence peri-implant marginal bone loss has not yet been determined., Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the early and late marginal bone loss around implants with long and short abutment height., Material and Methods: Electronic (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane) and hand literature searches were performed to identify articles published up to May 2018. A random-effects model was used to analyze the weighted mean difference of marginal bone loss between the long and short groups. Potential confounding factors, including implant/abutment connection, healing, and cement- or screw-retained restoration type, were investigated using meta-regression., Results: Fourteen studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, and 8 were further included in the meta-analysis. Around bone-level implants with a long abutment, marginal bone loss can be reduced significantly in both the early (-0.52 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.79 to -0.24; P=.001) and late (-0.53 mm; 95% CI: -1.03 to -0.02; P=.041) period. Among tissue-level implants, however, and compared with the short-abutment group, more bone loss was found during the early stage in the long abutment (weighted mean difference: 0.28 mm; 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.54; P=.031). Meta-regression failed to find any association between confounding factors and early bone loss around bone-level implants., Conclusions: Within the limitation of this systematic review and meta-analysis, abutment height can influence early bone loss around bone-level implants. However, the evidence is insufficient to determine its impact on late bone loss around bone-level implants and early and late bone loss around tissue-level implants., (Copyright © 2018 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Existing methods for evaluating marginal bone loss and tissue biotype around dental implants present with many limitations. The aim of this study was to examine the accuracy of high-resolution, 3-dimensional ultrasound to measure peri-implant tissue dimensions., Material and Methods: A 25-MHz ultrasound probe prototype was used to scan peri-implant tissues of 17 implants from seven fresh human cadavers. Four ultrasonic measurements were made as follows: the marginal bone level/thickness, and mucosal level/thickness. The readings were statistically compared to cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and/or open bone measurements., Results: The correlations (r) between the ultrasound and direct/CBCT readings of the four parameters ranged from 0.85 to 0.98 (p < 0.0001). The mean absolute difference in the four parameters between ultrasound-direct and ultrasound-CBCT ranged from 0.033 to 0.24 mm., Conclusion: Encouraging evidence is shown that ultrasound can accurately measure peri-implant tissue dimensions. Following clinical trial validations, ultrasound offers potential as a valuable tool to evaluate long-term peri-implant tissue stability without concerns of ionizing radiation and image artefacts around implants., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: A laser-microtextured surface (LMS) dental implant collar appears to promote a more tooth-like gingival collagen fiber attachment, which may help to stabilize peri-implant tissues. The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the clinical effect of an LMS versus non-LMS collar on crestal bone level and peri-implant soft tissue response., Methods: Electronic and manual literature searches were performed by two independent reviewers for articles written in English up to December 2016. Studies were included if they were human clinical trials with the purpose of evaluating the impact of an LMS collar on peri-implant hard and soft tissues. Cumulative marginal bone loss (MBL), probing depth (PD), and survival rate (SR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to show the performance of LMS implant collars. MBL, PD, and SR data were analyzed with a random effects model to compare the influence of LMS collars with non-LMS collars (e.g., roughened surface and machined surface)., Results: Fifteen human clinical studies (three randomized controlled trials, six cohort studies, and six case series) with 772 implants met the inclusion criteria. For the overall data, the weighted mean MBL was 0.72 mm (95% CI: 0.59 to 0.85 mm), PD was 1.81 mm (95% CI: 1.13 to 2.49 mm), and SR was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.95 to 0.98). MBL around an LMS collar was significantly less than around machined-surface collars (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -0.77; 95% CI: -1.01 to -0.52; I 2 = 95.2%; P <0.001). PD in the LMS group was significantly shallower than in the machined-surface group (WMD: -1.34; 95% CI: -1.62 to -1.05; I 2 = 81.4%; P <0.001). However, no statistically significant difference was detected for MBL between the LMS and roughened-surface groups (WMD: -0.04; 95% CI: -0.16 to 0.08; I 2 = 0.0%; P = 0.75). No statistically significant difference was found for SR between the LMS and non-LMS groups (risk ratio: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.04; I 2 = 0.0%; P = 0.91)., Conclusions: Meta-analysis showed that an LMS collar can reduce the amount of MBL and PD compared with a machined-surface collar. Due to high heterogeneity between the included studies, results should be interpreted cautiously.

Background: Mechanical loading is known to play an important role in bone remodeling., Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of direct low-magnitude high-frequency (LMHF) microvibration on dental implant bone formation and osseointegration., Materials and Methods: Titanium implants were installed in rabbit tibiae. The implants in the left legs were loaded with mechanical vibration (15 μm) at 10, 20, 30, and 40 Hz (10, 20, 30, and 40 Hz groups, respectively) for 30 minutes every day. The implants on the right legs were used as a sham control and did not receive a vibration load., Results: After 20 days, the 10, 20, and 30 Hz groups showed significantly greater newly formed bone volume, density, ratio of the bone surface area to the trabecular bone surface area, and ratio of the bone surface area in direct contact with osteoclasts versus the total bone surface area in the region of interest compared with the sham control group, especially the 20 Hz group. However, the 40 Hz group did not., Conclusions: In conclusion, the application of direct LMHF (10, 20, or 30 Hz) vibration on the implants promoted bone formation and osseointegration, especially at 20 Hz; however, the use of 40 Hz did not result in any significant improvement., (© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objectives: The objective of this study is (1) to compare the accuracy of an open‐sleeved static computer‐assisted implant system (sCAIS) with a closed‐sleeve sCAIS and free‐hand approach in immediate implant placement (IIP) of maxillary molar sites and (2) to investigate the influence of socket morphology on these approaches. Materials and Methods: Ninety partially edentulous duplicated maxillary models simulating three different molar sockets (type A, B, and C based on Smith and Tarnow's classification) were investigated. Three modalities, including sCAIS with open‐sleeves, sCAIS with closed‐sleeves, and free‐hand approach, were applied separately to 30 models with 120 sockets. A customized Python script automatically measured the deviations between the virtual and actual implant positions for all 360 implants. Results: The 3D deviations of sCAIS were significantly influenced by the socket and sleeve types. Both guided groups exhibited significantly less deviation than the free‐hand approach. Type A and C sockets resulted in better implant positions than type B socket sites. In type B sockets, the open‐sleeve group achieved significantly less deviation compared to the closed‐sleeve group, with respect to apical global (1.34 ± 0.53 vs. 1.84 ± 0.59 mm), coronal horizontal (0.68 ± 0.36 vs. 0.93 ± 0.34 mm), apical horizontal (1.21 ± 0.59 vs. 1.74 ± 0.63 mm), and angular (3.30 ± 1.41 vs. 4.41 ± 1.96°) deviations. Conclusions: Guided implant surgery significantly reduces deviations during molar IIP compared to free‐hand procedures. Furthermore, the use of open‐sleeve sCAIS appears to be more effective in minimizing deviations in type B sockets when compared with the closed‐sleeve guided system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This article describes a digital dental esthetic ceramic veneer treatment workflow using a stereolithographic template for teeth preparation. Clinical Considerations: We have presented the case of a 33‐year‐old woman with dental fluorosis who wanted an esthetic ceramic veneer treatment. A digital smile design was created on a virtual patient, and a virtual diagnostic wax‐up was made. Based on the suggested ceramic material thickness, virtual teeth preparation was performed on the diagnostic wax‐up. A special‐teeth preparation template was then created digitally and fabricated using a stereolithographic technique. This template guided the teeth preparation using a special bur with a stopper. The veneers were fabricated by CAD/CAM and delivered good esthetics and function. Conclusions: The stereolithographic tooth reduction template helps realize digital restorative planning. It provides better control of the reduction depth of the labial and incisal preparation, making the operation simpler. Clinical significance: The digital dental esthetic ceramic veneer treatment workflow described here using a stereolithographic template for teeth preparation helped with the accurate control of reduction depth for minimally invasive teeth preparation, making the operation simpler, which is a significant improvement over the previous methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare the accuracy of computer‐guided surgery and freehand surgery on flapless immediate implant placement (IIP) in the anterior maxilla. Material and Methods: In this split‐mouth design, 24 maxillary incisors in eight human cadaver heads were randomly divided into two groups: computer‐guided surgery (n = 12) and freehand surgery (n = 12). Preoperatively, cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were acquired, and all implants were planned with a software (Blue Sky Plan3). Then, two types of surgeries were performed. To assess any differences in position, the postoperative CBCT was subsequently matched with the preoperative planning. For all the implants, the angular, global, depth, bucco‐lingual, and mesio‐distal deviations between the virtual and actual implant positions were measured. Results: A significant lower mean angular deviation (3.11 ± 1.55°, range: 0.66–4.95, p = 0.002) and the global deviation at both coronal (0.85 ± 0.38 mm, range: 0.42–1.51, p = 0.004) and apical levels (0.93 ± 0.34 mm, range: 0.64–1.72, p < 0.001) were observed in the guided group when compared to the freehand group (6.78 ± 3.31°, range: 3.08–14.98; 1.43 ± 0.49 mm, range: 0.65–2.31, and 2.2 ± 0.79 mm, range: 1.01–4.02). However, the accuracy of these two approaches was similar for the depth (p = 0.366). In the buccal direction, the mean deviations of both groups showed a general tendency of implants to be positioned facially, occurring more in implants of the freehand group. Conclusion: In flapless IIP, computer‐guided surgery showed superior accuracy than freehand surgery in transferring the implant position from the planning. However, even with the help of a guide, the final fixture position tends to shift toward a facial direction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]