Clinical and laboratory passive fit assessment of implant-supported zirconia restorations fabricated using conventional and digital workflow

Internal fit and marginal adaptation of all-ceramic implant-supported hybrid abutment crowns with custom-milled screw-channels on Titanium-base: in-vitro study

BACKGROUND

Advancements in digital dentistry helped in custom-milling screw-channels in implant-supported restorations; however, the fit of these restorations is still unclear especially for contemporary computer aided designing/computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) materials. This study aimed to compare the internal and marginal fit of Ultra translucent multilayered zirconia versus lithium disilicate implant-supported hybrid abutment crowns (HACs) constructed with custom-milled screw-channels on Titanium-base.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 24 HACs with custom-milled screw-channels were constructed from lithium disilicate (Group LDS) and Ultra translucent multilayered zirconia (Group UT) using digital workflow (n = 12). The internal and marginal gaps of HACs on their corresponding Titanium-bases were assessed using replica technique and stereomicroscope, respectively. After testing for normality, quantitative data were expressed as mean and standard deviation and compared using independent t-test at a level of significance (P ≤ 0.05).

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between Group LDS and Group UT in terms of marginal and internal fit. The internal and marginal gaps in both groups were within the accepted values reported in literature.

CONCLUSIONS

UT and LDS HACs with custom-milled screw-channels demonstrated comparable and acceptable internal fit and marginal adaptations to Ti-base, which lied within the range reported in literature.

Intraoral scanners in implant prosthodontics. A narrative review

OBJECTIVES

To review the developments in intraoral scanner (IOS) technologies applied in implant prosthodontics, emphasizing their influence on the accuracy of digital impressions, occlusal registrations, and the fit of implant-supported restorations.

DATA

A collection of published articles related to implant prosthodontics, the accuracy of digital impressions, occlusal registration, and the fit of implant-supported fixed restorations.

SOURCES

Three search engines were selected: Medline/PubMed, EBSCO, and Cochrane. A manual search was also conducted.

STUDY SELECTION

A literature search screened relevant databases and journals for studies on IOS applications in digital implant prosthodontic workflows from Dec 2018 to Dec 2023. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized control trials, clinical trials, case series, and in vitro research focused on the use of IOS in digital implant prosthodontics.

CONCLUSIONS

The increased utilization of digital dental technologies has led to significant integration of digital implant prosthodontic workflows into clinicians' clinical practice. Several variables affect the accuracy of digital impressions generated by IOS. Generally, the prevailing opinion in academic papers is that digital workflows are suitable for addressing short-span implant-supported restorations. However, when it comes to long-span defects, the accuracy of digital workflows is still a matter of debate. Digital bite registration is an integral part of the workflow. It depends mainly on the defect size and location, scan strategy, anatomical tooth variations, overbite and other factors. The overall fit of digitally prefabricated implant restorations comprises of proximal, occlusal contacts and how accurately the restoration connects with implants. Research methodologies need standardization for further validation.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

In clinical practice, it is essential to have a thorough and up-to-date comprehension of various factors that can affect the accuracy of digital impressions and the fit of the final prosthesis in implant prosthodontics.

Accuracy of intraoral scan with prefabricated aids and stereophotogrammetry compared with open tray impressions for complete-arch implant-supported prosthesis: A clinical study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this clinical study was to compare the accuracy of intraoral scan system (IOS) with prefabricated aids and stereophotogrammetry (SPG) compared with open tray implant impression (OI) for complete-arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (CIFDP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients needing CIFDP were enrolled in this study. OI, reference standard, IOS with prefabricated aids, and SPG were performed for each patient. Distance and angle deviations between all pairs of abutment analogs, root mean square (RMS) errors between the aligned test and reference model, and chairside time were measured. The effect of inter-abutment distance, jaw (maxilla or mandible), number of implants, and arch length on deviations was analyzed. The mixed effect model was applied to analyze deviations and RMS errors.

RESULTS

Fifteen consecutive individuals (6 females and 9 males, 47-77 years old) with 22 arches (9 upper and 13 lower jaws) and 115 implants were included. There was no significant difference in distance deviation comparing SPG and IOS with OI (p > .05). IOS showed a significantly greater angle deviation and RMS errors than SPG (median 0.40° vs. 0.31°, 69 μm vs. 45 μm, p < .01). The inter-abutment distance was negatively correlated with the accuracy of SPG and IOS (p < .05). The chairside time for IOS, SPG, and OI was 10.49 ± 3.50, 14.71 ± 2.86, and 20.20 ± 3.01 min, respectively (p < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of SPG and IOS with prefabricated aids was comparable. IOS was the most efficient workflow.

Effect of different fabrication workflows on the passive fit of screw-retained bar splinting two interforaminal implants: a parallel blinded randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

To clinically compare the effect of the conventional and the digital workflows on the passive fit of a screw retained bar splinting two inter-foraminal implants.

METHODS

The current study was designed to be a parallel triple blinded randomised clinical trial. Thirty six completely edentulous patients were selected and simply randomized into two groups; conventional group (CG) and digital group (DG). The participants, investigator and outcome assessor were blinded. In the group (CG), the bar was constructed following a conventional workflow in which an open top splinted impression and a lost wax casting technology were used. However, in group (DG), a digital workflow including a digital impression and a digital bar milling technology was adopted. Passive fit of each bar was then evaluated clinically by applying the screw resistance test using the "flag" technique in the passive and non passive situations. The screw resistance test parameter was also calculated. Unpaired t-test was used for intergroup comparison. P-value < 0.05 was the statistical significance level. The study protocol was reviewed by the Research Ethics Committee in the author's university (Rec IM051811). Registration of the clinical trial was made on clinical trials.gov ID NCT05770011. An informed consent was obtained from all participants.

RESULTS

Non statistically significant difference was denoted between both groups in all situations. In the passive situation, the mean ± standard deviation values were 1789.8° ± 20.7 and1786.1° ± 30.7 for the groups (CG) and (DG) respectively. In the non passive situation, they were 1572.8° ± 54.2 and 1609.2° ± 96.9. Regarding the screw resistance test parameter, they were 217° ± 55.3 and 176° ± 98.8.

CONCLUSION

Conventional and digital fabrication workflows had clinically comparable effect on the passive fit of screw retained bar attachments supported by two dental implants.

Full-arch restoration with the NEXUS IOS® system: A retrospective clinical evaluation of 37 restorations after a one year of follow-up

OBJECTIVES

Report the results with a novel workflow of digital restoration for completely edentulous patients with implant supported full arch fixed dental prostheses (ISFDP).

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective clinical study was based on the evaluation from a cohort of 29 patients restored with 37 ISFDP designed and manufactured from the data captured by a direct intraoral scan, using a novel full digital system (NEXUS IOS®, Osteon Medical, a Keystone Dental Group company, Melbourne, Australia). Data was collected over a 3-year period, in six different dental centers. This study reported on the clinical parameters including: precision of marginal fit, functional and aesthetic integration of Nexus ISFDP. All patients were followed for a period of one year post delivery. Implant survival, biologic and prosthetic complications were assessed, at one year. A statistical analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

All 37 ISFDP were deemed clinically acceptable on insertion. Implant survival at one year was 100 %. The biologic and prosthetic complications were minimal during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

ISFDP, designed and manufactured using the NEXUS IOS® system, are clinically acceptable, with a low incidence of complications at one year. Long-term clinical studies are needed.

STATEMENT OF CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Within the limitations of this study (retrospective design, small patient sample, limited follow-up) the NEXUS IOS® system seems to represent a viable solution for the restoration of completely edentulous patients with ISFDP, in a full digital workflow.

The Influence of Laboratory Scanner versus Intra-Oral Scanner on Determining Axes and Distances between Three Implants in a Straight Line by Using Two Different Intraoral Scan Bodies: A Pilot In Vitro Study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the inter-implant distance, inter-implant axis, and intra-implant axis of three implants in a straight line by using a laboratory scanner (LBS) versus an intra-oral scanner (IOS) with two different intra-oral scan bodies (ISBs).

METHODS

A 3D model was printed with internal hex implant analogs of three implants in positions 15#, 16#, and 17#. Two standard intra-oral scan bodies (ISBs) were used: MIS ISB (two-piece titanium) and Zirkonzhan ISB (two-piece titanium). Both ISBs were scanned using 7 Series dental wings (LBS) and 30 times using Primescan (IOS). For each scan, a stereolithography (STL) file was created and a comparison between all the scans was performed through superimposition of the STL files by using 3D analysis software (PolyWorks® 2020; InnovMetric, Québec, QC, Canada). A Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was performed followed by a Mann-Whitney test (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

The change in inter-implant distance for the MIS ISB was significantly lower compared to the ZZ (p < 0.05). The change in intra-implant angle was significantly lower for the ZZ ISB compared to MIS (p < 0.05). The changes in inter-implant angle between the mesial and middle and between the middle and distal were significantly lower for MIS compared to ZZ in contrast to mesial to distal, which was significantly higher (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both ISBs showed differences in all the parameters between the LBS and the IOS. The geometry of the scan abutment had an impact on the inter-implant distance as the changes in the inter-implant distance were significantly lower for the MIS ISB. The changes in the intra-implant angle were significantly lower for the ZZ ISB. There is a need for further research examining the influence of geometry, material, and scan abutment parts on the trueness.

Accuracy of photogrammetric imaging versus conventional impressions for complete arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: A comparative clinical study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Clinical studies on the accuracy of the photogrammetric imaging technique for complete arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses are lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the accuracy (trueness) of photogrammetric imaging for complete arch implant-supported prostheses by comparing photogrammetric imaging with verified conventional splinted impressions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Completely edentulous arches with at least 4 implants were included. Both photogrammetric imaging and conventional splinted impressions were performed in each jaw. The conventional casts were verified and scanned by using a laboratory scanner as the control. The distances and angulations between different implants (interimplant distances and interimplant angulations) were measured in all photogrammetric and conventional standard tessellation language (STL) files by using a reverse-engineering software program. The distance deviations between the photogrammetric and conventional impressions of the same participant were calculated as the primary outcome, and the angular deviations were obtained as the secondary outcome with descriptive analyses. The comparison between distance deviations and the clinically acceptable level of deviations (150 μm) was conducted by using the 1-sample t test. The effect of interimplant distances, interimplant angulations, and jaw (maxilla or mandible) on deviations was analyzed by using the Spearman correlation analysis, Kruskal-Wallis test, or Student t test, depending on the type of data (α=0.05 for all tests).

RESULTS

Fourteen edentulous jaws were included. The overall distance deviation of photogrammetric imaging was 70 ±57 μm, significantly lower than the clinically acceptable level of misfit (150 μm; P<.001). The overall angular deviation was 0.432 ±0.348 degrees. The distance deviations were correlated with interimplant distances with a correlation coefficient (r) of 0.371 (P=.002). Interimplant angulation was not correlated with distance or angular deviations (P=.914, P=.914). Jaw was not correlated with distance or angular deviations either (P=.190, P=.209).

CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy (trueness) of photogrammetric imaging of complete arch implant-supported prostheses was within a clinically acceptable range of errors. Distance deviations increased with greater interimplant distances. Interimplant angulations and jaw (maxilla or mandible) had no significant effect on the accuracy of photogrammetric imaging.

The effect of different implant impression splinting techniques and time on the dimensional accuracy: An in vitro study

Splinting of impression copings is generally recommended for more complex implant-supported restorations. It can also be used in the digital workflow when the control model is needed to improve the fit of the prosthesis. However, there is a lack of knowledge on how dimensional accuracy is affected by different splinting techniques and time factors.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the time factor on the dimensional stability of different implant impression splinting strategies used in the conventional and digital workflow.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten pairs of implant analogs were fixed to a stainless steel bar. Modified impression copings were connected to the analogs and eight splinting strategies evaluated (n=10): 1) type I impression plaster (PLA), 2) autopolymerizing acrylic resin, cut and rejoin technique (PTR), 3) light-cured acrylic resin, cut and rejoin technique (ILC), 4) light-cured acrylic resin, no cutting and rejoining (ILN), 5) VPS bite registration material (SBR), 6) bis-acryl bite registration material (LXB), 7) bis-acryl composite resin (PTP), 8) 3D printed splint (3DP). In each group, the position of modified impression copings was scanned with an accurate laboratory scanner at different time points: 1) unsplinted impression copings (baseline), 2) 2 hours after splinting, 3) 24 hours after splinting. Modified impression coping design allowed using metrology software to measure and compare distance, vertical, angle and rotational deviations between impression copings.

RESULTS

All types of splints showed dimensional deviations. After 2 hours of splinting, the lowest distance deviation was recorded in PTR (15.4±6.15µm), vertical deviation - in ILC (19.2±27.37µm), angle deviation - in ILC (0.08±0.1°), rotation - in LXB (0.2±0.24°) groups. Comparing results 2 and 24 hours after connection of impression copings, statistically significant deviations in the distance were recorded in groups PLA (-5.6±5.95 µm), PTR (5.5±7.01µm), ILN (19.2±14.26µm), PTP (23.8±12.55µm).

CONCLUSION

The best dimensional accuracy was observed in the ILC group, followed by PTR and 3DP groups.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Proper selection of splinting technique and polymerization time can increase the accuracy of conventional or digital impressions. Splinting techniques with rigid materials, proper polymerization and compensating for material shrinkage produce the best results.

PEEK Biomaterial in Long-Term Provisional Implant Restorations: A Review

Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has become a useful polymeric biomaterial due to its superior properties and has been increasingly used in dentistry, especially in prosthetic dentistry and dental implantology. Promising applications of PEEK in dentistry are dental implants, temporary abutment, implant-supported provisional crowns, fixed prosthesis, removable denture framework, and finger prosthesis. PEEK as a long-term provisional implant restoration has not been studied much. Hence, this review article aims to review PEEK as a long-term provisional implant restoration for applications focusing on implant dentistry. Articles published in English on PEEK biomaterial for long-term provisional implant restoration were searched in Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Scopus. Then, relevant articles were selected and included in this literature review. PEEK presents suitable properties for various implant components in implant dentistry, including temporary and long-term provisional restorations. The modifications of PEEK result in wider applications in clinical dentistry. The PEEK reinforced by 30-50% carbon fibers can be a suitable material for the various implant components in dentistry.

In vitro and in vivo accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of the study was to compare the accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions for fixed dental prosthesis under in vitro and in vivo conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eight patients (five women and three men) with at least one edentulous arch and with 4-6 osseointegrated implants participated in this study. For each edentulous arch (n = 10), experimental screw-retained titanium bar with attached four scan bodies was fabricated. The bar containing four scan bodies was screw-retained intraorally on implants and scanned with Trios 3 intraoral scanner eight times (IOS group, in vivo). Then, the bar was attached to the master cast and scanned eight times again with the same intraoral scanner (MIOS group, in vitro). Finally, the bar with scan bodies was scanned 8 times with a laboratory scanner (reference). Precision and trueness were calculated for 3 distances and 3 angles between the scan bodies (1-2, 1-3, and 1-4) in IOS and MIOS groups.

RESULTS

Precision and trueness for the largest distance (1-4) were found to be 44 ± 18 µm and 32 ± 19 µm for the IOS group and 31 ± 16 µm and 30 ± 14 µm for MIOS group, respectively. Precision and trueness for the angle between the most distant scan bodies (1-4) were 0.22 ± 0.14° and 0.18 ± 0.10° for the IOS group and 0.16 ± 0.11° and 0.07 ± 0.05° for MIOS group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoral conditions moderately affected the precision and trueness of Trios 3 (3Shape) intraoral scanner. Results of in vitro accuracy studies cannot be directly transferred to the clinical field.

The direct digital workflow in fixed implant prosthodontics: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this narrative review was to examine the applicability of IOS procedures regarding single and multiple fixed implant restorations. Clinical outcomes for monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate restorations produced through a direct digital workflow were reported.

METHODS

A MEDLINE (Pubmed) search of the relevant English-language literature spanning from January 1st 2015 until March 31st 2020 was conducted. In vitro studies comparing digital implant impression accuracy by different IOS devices or in vitro studies examining differences in accuracy between digital and conventional impression procedures were included. Also, RCTs, clinical trials and case series on the success and/or survival of monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate restorations on implants, manufactured completely digitally were included. In vitro and in vivo studies reporting on restorations produced through an indirect digital workflow, case reports and non-English language articles were excluded. The aim was to investigate the accuracy of IOS for single and multiple fixed implant restorations compared to the conventional impression methods and report on the variables that influence it. Finally, this study aimed to report on the survival and success of fixed implant-retained restorations fabricated using the direct digital workflow.

RESULTS

For the single and short-span implant sites, IOS accuracy was high and the deviations in the position of the virtual implant fell within the acceptable clinical limits. In the complete edentulous arch with multiple implants, no consensus regarding the superiority of the conventional, splinted, custom tray impression procedure compared to the IOS impression was identified. Moreover, complete-arch IOS impressions were more accurate than conventional, non-splinted, open or close tray impressions. Factors related to scanbody design as well as scanner generation, scanning range and interimplant distance were found to influence complete-arch scanning accuracy. Single implant-retained monolithic restorations exhibited high success and survival rates and minor complications for short to medium follow-up periods.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of identified studies were in vitro and this limited their clinical significance. Nevertheless, intraoral scanning exhibited high accuracy both for single and multiple implant restorations. Available literature on single-implant monolithic restorations manufactured through a complete digital workflow shows promising results for a follow-up of 3-5 years.

Displacement of scan body during screw tightening: A comparative in vitro study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of displacement while tightening the screw of scan bodies, which were compared according to the material type.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three types of scan bodies whose base regions were made up of polyether ether ketone (PEEK) material [Straumann Group, Dentium Group, and Myfit (PEEK) Group] and another scan body whose base region was made up of titanium material [Myfit (Metal) Group] were used (15 per group). The reference model was fabricated by aligning the scan body library on the central axis of the implant, and moving this position by the resin model. The screws of the scan bodies were tightened to the implant fixture with torques of 5 Ncm, 10 Ncm, and a hand tightening torque. After the application of the torque, the scan bodies were scanned using a laboratory scanner. To evaluate the vertical, horizontal, and 3-dimensional (3D) displacements, a 3D inspection software program was used. To examine the difference among groups, one-way analysis of variance and Tukey's HSD post hoc test were used (α=.05).

RESULTS

There were significant differences in 3D, vertical, and horizontal displacements among the different types of scan bodies (P<.001). There was a significantly lower displacement in the Straumann group than in the Myfit (PEEK) and Dentium groups (P<.05).

CONCLUSION

The horizontal displacement in all groups was less than 10 µm. With the hand tightening torque, a high vertical displacement of over 100 µm occurred in PEEK scan bodies (Myfit and Dentium). Therefore, it is recommended to apply a tightening torque of 5 Ncm instead of a hand tightening torque.

Congruence between Meshes and Library Files of Implant Scanbodies: An In Vitro Study Comparing Five Intraoral Scanners

Purpose. To compare the reliability of five different intraoral scanners (IOSs) in the capture of implant scanbodies (SBs) and to verify the dimensional congruence between the meshes (MEs) of the SBs and the corresponding library file (LF). Methods. A gypsum cast of a fully edentulous maxilla with six implant analogues and SBs screwed on was scanned with five different IOSs (PRIMESCAN^®, CS 3700^®, MEDIT i-500^®, ITERO ELEMENTS 5D^®, and Emerald S^®). Ten scans were taken for each IOS. The resulting MEs were imported to reverse engineering software for 3D analysis, consisting of the superimposition of the SB LF onto each SB ME. Then, a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the deviations between MEs and LF was performed. A careful statistical analysis was performed. Results. PRIMESCAN^® showed the highest congruence between SB MEs and LF, with the lowest mean absolute deviation (25.5 ± 5.0 μm), immediately followed by CS 3700^® (27.0 ± 4.3 μm); the difference between them was not significant (p = 0.1235). PRIMESCAN^® showed a significantly higher congruence than MEDIT i-500^® (29.8 ± 4.8 μm, p < 0.0001), ITERO ELEMENTS 5D^® (34.2 ± 9.3 μm, p < 0.0001), and Emerald S^® (38.3 ± 7.8 μm, p < 0.0001). CS 3700^® had a significantly higher congruence than MEDIT i-500^® (p = 0.0004), ITERO ELEMENTS 5D^® (p < 0.0001), and Emerald S^® (p < 0.0001). Significant differences were also found between MEDIT i-500^® and ITERO ELEMENTS 5D^® (p < 0.0001), MEDIT i-500^® and Emerald S^® (p < 0.0001), and ITERO ELEMENTS 5D^® and Emerald S^® (p < 0.0001). Significant differences were found among different SBs when scanned with the same IOS. The deviations of the IOSs showed different directions and patterns. With PRIMESCAN^®, ITERO ELEMENTS 5D^®, and Emerald S^®, the MEs were included inside the LF; with CS 3700^®, the LF was included in the MEs. MEDIT i-500^® showed interpolation between the MEs and LF, with no clear direction for the deviation. Conclusions. Statistically different levels of congruence were found between the SB MEs and the corresponding LF when using different IOSs. Significant differences were also found between different SBs when scanned with the same IOS. Finally, the qualitative evaluation revealed different directions and patterns for the five IOSs.