Search

Objectives:  The aims of this study were to evaluate posterior maxillary alveolar bone dimensions and to compare these dimensions in males and females., Materials and Methods:  The sample consisted of 102 cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images for 62 male patients (mean age 29.92 ± 9.04 years) and 40 female patients (mean age 29.70 ± 9.54 years). Four distances and three densities were measured; a multivariate analysis of variance and Mann-Whitney's U test were applied to compare the differences between sexes., Results:  For the first maxillary molar, there were significant differences between males and females in terms of coronal width (13.95 ± 1.31 and 13.22 ± 1.159 mm, respectively) and middle width (14.28 ± 1.43 and 13.57 ± 1.478 mm, respectively). However, no significant difference was found regarding height (7.93 ± 3.8 mm for both) or apical width (14.68 ± 2 mm for both). Regarding the second maxillary molar, significant differences between males and females were found in terms of coronal width (14.66 ± 1.63 and 13.54 ± 1.512 mm, respectively), middle width (14.35 ± 1.825 and 13.25 ± 1.52 mm, respectively), and height (7.29 ± 3.00 and 8.66 ± 3.16 mm, respectively), whereas the gender dimorphism regarding apical width had borderline significance (14.09 ± 1.731 mm; p  = 0.048). No significant differences were found regarding density., Conclusion:  The minimum average alveolar bone height for the second maxillary molar region was 7.29 ± 30 mm with significant gender dimorphism. Therefore, CBCT scans should be recommended prior to immediate implant placement., Competing Interests: None declared., (The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).)

Introduction: Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is a polymer that is used in the construction of orthopaedic and dental implants. It is also used to construct removable and fixed dental prostheses due to its superior mechanical and esthetic properties compared to conventional materials. This systematic review aims to analyse and appraise the literature concerning PEEK dental prostheses critically., Methods: The following focused question was constructed 'Are dental prostheses made of PEEK inferior to those made of other materials in terms of clinical- and patient-reported outcomes?'. The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) tool was used for the quality assessment of the randomised clinical trials. The STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) quality assessment tool was used to assess the quality of observational studies and the case reports were evaluated using the CARE (Case Report) guidelines., Results: A total of 12 studies were included in this review. Two case studies received an overall grade of medium and the overall quality of six studies was graded as 'low'. All three observational studies and the only randomised controlled trial received scores of 'medium'., Conclusion: PEEK-based dental prostheses may provide a viable and more esthetic alternative to conventional prosthodontic appliances. However, within the limitations of this study is the evidence to ascertain the long-term viability of PEEK-based dental prostheses. Future studies should focus on conducting large-scale, multicenter trials to compare the survival rate of PEEK prostheses to that of conventionally available prosthodontic appliances.