Evaluating the Role of AI in Predicting the Success of Dental Implants Based on Preoperative CBCT Images: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Dental implant surgery has become a widely accepted method for replacing missing teeth. However, the success of dental implant procedures can be influenced by various factors, including the quality of preoperative planning and assessment. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging provides valuable insights into a patient's oral anatomy, but accurately predicting implant success remains a challenge.

Materials and Methods

In this randomized controlled trial (RCT), a cohort of 150 patients requiring dental implants was randomly divided into two groups: an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted group and a traditional assessment group. Preoperative CBCT images of all patients were acquired and processed. The AI-assisted group utilized a machine learning model trained on historical data to assess implant success probability based on CBCT images, while the traditional assessment group relied on conventional methods and clinician expertise. Key parameters such as bone density, bone quality, and anatomical features were considered in the AI model.

Results

After the completion of the study, the AI-assisted group demonstrated a significantly higher implant success rate, with 92% of implants successfully integrating into the bone compared to 78% in the traditional assessment group. The AI model showed an accuracy of 87% in predicting implant success, whereas traditional assessment methods achieved an accuracy of 71%. Additionally, the AI-assisted group had a lower rate of complications and required fewer postoperative interventions compared to the traditional assessment group.

Conclusion

The AI-assisted approach significantly improved implant success rates and reduced complications, underscoring the importance of incorporating AI into the dental implant planning process.

Survival and Complications of Single Dental Implants in the Edentulous Mandible following Immediate or Delayed Loading: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Introduction

The lifespan of an edentulous mandible with one median implant to hold a full denture for 24 months was evaluated to see if the early loading had any impact on it. Single-implant denture retention for the mandibular region was proposed by "Cordioli et al. in the 1990s.

Objectives

Whether rapid loading and placement of a "single median implant" may result in the implant survival rate comparable to rehabilitation with a single implant and second-stage surgery.

Methods

It was found that 81 of the 158 implant recipients had quick loading, whereas the rest had delayed loading (77 patients). Patients in the context of "delayed loading group" had follow-up appointments at 1 month, 4 months, 12 months, and 24 months. In addition, the nine implants failed in the 3 months after loading in a quick loading group, while just one implant failed before loading. Median implant survival at 2 years was the study's main goal. Direct loading had a 7% fatality rate advantage over traditional loading because of the alleged advantages of immediate loading, including the avoidance of second-stage surgery. Prosthetic problems were evaluated using Fisher's exact test.

Results

A higher rate of implant survival was not seen when implants were loaded more quickly (P = 0.81). A statistically significant difference (P = 0.019) was seen in implant survival between the therapy groups.

Conclusion

Single implant loading in an edentulous mandible has a worse survival rate than delayed loading, according to all available research.

Marginal bone loss in implant placement among Indian patients with fresh extraction socket

It is of interest to examine the Marginal Bone Loss (MBL) around a single titanium implant that was immediately loaded and implanted in a healed or new extraction site in the maxilla over a period of five years. This study involved 36 participants (21 men and 15 women, with an average age of 31 years), all of whom needed to have a single implant placed in the front maxillae. The average marginal bone loss (MBL) in extraction sockets increased by 0.27±0.18 mm after a year, 0.26± 0.17 mm after three years, and 0.21 ±0.18 mm after five years. The mean change in MBL for the group of healed ridges was 0.27± 0.18 mm for one year, 0.22±0.18 mm for three years, and 0.21± 0.17mm for five years. Thus, implants loaded immediately and positioned in either healed ridges or extraction sockets had a similar effect on the local bone.

Three-dimensional evaluation of extended pour alginate impression materials following variable storage time intervals and conditions

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the dimensional accuracy of the stone casts made of three extended pour alginate impressions materials (Cavex Colorchange, Kromopan, and Neocolloid) following storage under different storage conditions and pouring at different time intervals.

Materials and Methods

A maxillary Frasaco (dentulous) model was selected as a standard model. Index holes of 1 mm depth and 1 mm diameter were made on the palatal cusp tips of right and left first premolars, mesiopalatal cusp tips of right and left third molars and in the midline of the palate, perpendicular to a line joining the index holes made on cusp tips of the first premolars as reference points for measurement. A single uniformly spaced custom tray was fabricated with heat-cure acrylic resin and used to make impressions for the entire study. A total of 210 impressions of the master model were made, seventy impressions were made from each of the alginate material brands and were subjected to three storage conditions (open air, uncontrolled humidity, and 100% controlled humidity) for three different storage time intervals (0, 1, 6 h). Since no storage was done in the immediate-pour group, it contained 10 specimens from each brand. Following the designated storage time interval, all impressions were poured in type IV gypsum. Measurements of stone casts were done in three dimensions, anteroposterior, lateral using Measuroscope and vertical by Dial Gauge. Data were organized in tables and statistical analyses were performed. Three-way ANOVAs were used to check if the material brands, storage time intervals, and conditions affect the measurements. Tukey HSD post hoc tests were used for the multiple comparisons if ANOVA is significant. One sample t-test was used to compare between the casts made of alginate brands and the master model. Significance level was set to α < 0.05 for all tests.

Results

Results showed that the material brands, storage time intervals, and conditions do affect the measurements in all three dimensions (all P < 0.05). In addition, all two-way and three-way interactions were significant for all measurements except the interaction of storage time intervals and conditions for B-C (lateral) measurements, and interaction of material brands and storage time intervals for C-D (anteroposteriorly) measurements. When stone casts were compared to the master model, immediate pour, and storage for 1 h in 100% controlled humidity resulted in statistically insignificant changes among all three alginate impression brands. In addition, the specimens made of Cavex Colorchange and Kromopan following storage in uncontrolled humidity condition for 1 h showed statistical insignificance when compared to the master model.

Conclusion

Within the limitations of this study, it can be extrapolated that, although this class of alginate impression materials was manufactured for extended pour purposes, clinicians should avoid storage of the studied brands for 6 h. Whenever 1 h to pour is necessary, 100% controlled humidity is the ideal and standardized environment for all three alginate brands. Perhaps, Cavex Colorchange, and Kromopan can be safely stored in uncontrolled humidity condition while maintaining their optimal dimensional accuracy.