Treatment effect of implant-supported fixed complete dentures and implant overdentures on patient-reported outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES To analyze the effect of implant treatment in edentulous patients rehabilitated with implant-supported fixed complete dentures (IFCDs) or implant overdentures (IODs) on dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs). MATERIALS AND METHODS In January 2022, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PubMed Central, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were screened for prospective clinical studies on completely edentulous patients treated with IFCDs and/or IODs, reporting pre-treatment and follow-up dPROs. Hedges' g effect sizes (ES) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Afterward, meta-analyses were conducted using random effect models. RESULTS A total number of 1608 records was initially identified. Of those, 28 studies reporting dPROs from 1457 patients were finally included. The applied dental patient-reported outcome measures (dPROMs) included several versions of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) or specific items assessing satisfaction with Visual Analogue Scales (VAS). The overall ES was large for rehabilitation with IFCDs (1.68 [CI: 1.15, 2.20]) and IODs (1.26 [CI: 0.99, 1.52]) with no significant difference (p = .165) between the two. Denture stability was the only factor rated significantly higher for IFCDs (ES difference: 2.37 [CI: 0.21, 4.54]; p = .032). Subgroup analyses revealed moderately higher ES for IODs on two implants relative to one implant (ES difference: 0.73 [CI: 0.34, 1.12]; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS There is a strong positive effect of implant treatment in edentulous patients, independent of the type of prosthetic rehabilitation. In patients seeking high stability, IFCDs may be preferable. In mandibular IODs on a single implant, there was a significantly positive effect of an additional implant on dPROs

Clinical performance of tooth implant-supported removable partial dentures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE To assess the clinical performance of tooth implant-supported removable partial dentures in terms of abutment survival in relation to the attachment system used. METHODS An electronic search in MEDLINE/PubMed Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Survival rates after 3 years and 5 years, loss, and complication rates per 100 years were estimated by Poisson regression. RESULTS A total of twelve studies were included; eleven studies were used for the meta-analysis. Survival analysis for mixed attachments showed an estimated survival rate of 100% after 3 years and 5 years. For uniform attachments, the estimated survival rate was 99.3% after 3 years and 98.8% after 5 years. Tooth abutment survival analysis for mixed attachments estimated a survival rate of 95% after 3 years and 91.7% after 5 years: Uniform attachments reached a survival rate of 97.2% after 3 years and 95.4% after 5 years. The prosthetic survival rate was 100% for mixed and uniform abutments after 3 years and 5 years of function. CONCLUSIONS Tooth implant-supported removable partial dentures can be considered as a reliable option with excellent prosthetic and implant survival rates and favorable rates for the abutments after 3-year and 5-year follow-ups. Complications may be reduced when 5 or more abutments are used. CLINICAL RELEVANCE Tooth implant-supported removable partial dentures are a favorable and potential alternative to restore a partially edentulous arch by optimizing the number and distribution of abutments

Accuracy of intraoral scanning in completely and partially edentulous maxillary and mandibular jaws: an in vitro analysis

OBJECTIVES New generation intraoral scanners are promoted to be suitable for digital scans of long-span edentulous spaces and completely edentulous arches; however, the evidence is lacking. The current study evaluated the accuracy of intraoral scanning (IOS) in partially and completely edentulous arch models and analyzed the influence of operator experience on accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS Four different resin models (completely and partially edentulous maxilla and mandible) were scanned, using a new generation IOS device (n = 20 each). Ten scans of each model were performed by an IOS-experienced and an inexperienced operator. An industrial high-precision scanner was employed to obtain reference scans. IOS files of each model-operator combination, their respective reference scan files (n = 10 each; total = 80), as well as the IOS files from each model generated by the same operator, were superimposed (n = 45; total = 360) to calculate trueness and precision. An ANOVA for mixed models and post hoc t tests for mixed models were used to assess group-wise differences (α = 0.05). RESULTS The median overall trueness and precision were 24.2 μm (IQR 20.7-27.4 μm) and 18.3 μm (IQR 14.4-22.1 μm), respectively. The scans of the inexperienced operator had significantly higher trueness in the edentulous mandibular model (p = 0.0001) and higher precision in the edentulous maxillary model (p = 0.0004). CONCLUSION The accuracy of IOS for partially and completely edentulous arches in in vitro settings was high. Experience with IOS had small influence on the accuracy of the scans. CLINICAL RELEVANCE IOS with the tested new generation intraoral scanner may be suitable for the fabrication of removable dentures regardless of clinician's experience in IOS

In vitro scan accuracy and time efficiency in various implant-supported fixed partial denture situations.

OBJECTIVES To compare the accuracy and time efficiency of different digital workflows in 3 implant-supported fixed partial denture situations. METHODS Three partially edentulous maxillary models with 2 implants (Model 1: implants at lateral incisor sites; Model 2: implants at right canine and first molar sites; Model 3: implants at right first premolar and first molar sites) were digitized (ATOS Capsule 200MV120, n=1) for reference scans. Test scans were performed for direct (Primescan (DDW-P) and Trios 3 (DDW-T)) and indirect (IDW) digital workflows (n=14). For IDW, stone casts (type IV) were obtained from vinylsiloxanether impressions and digitized (S600 Arti). The scan/impression and post processing times were recorded. Reference and test scans were superimposed (GOM Inspect) to calculate 3D point, inter-implant distance, and angular deviations. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used for trueness and precision analyses (α=.05). RESULTS Tested workflows affected trueness (P≤.030) and precision (P<.001) of scans (3D point, inter-implant distance, and angular deviations) within models. DDW-P had the highest accuracy (3D point deviations) for models 1 and 3 (P≤.046). IDW had the lowest accuracy for model 2 (P<.01). DDW-P had the highest accuracy (inter-implant distance deviations) for model 3 (P≤.048). Direct digital workflow mostly led to lower angular deviations (P≤.040), and higher precision for models 2 (mesiodistal direction) and 3 (P<.001). The time for direct digital workflow was shorter (P<.001), DDW-P being more efficient than DDW-T (P=.008). CONCLUSION Direct digital workflow was more accurate and efficient than indirect digital workflow in tested partial edentulism situations with 2 implants. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Tested intraoral scanners can be recommended for accurate and efficient impressions of anterior and posterior 3- or 4-unit implant-supported fixed partial dentures

Effect of adhesive system, resin cement, heat-pressing technique, and thermomechanical aging on the adhesion between titanium base and a high-performance polymer.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM Even though polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has become popular for various prosthetic indications, a standard adhesive protocol to bond the PEEK to titanium bases has not been yet established. How the heat-pressing technique performs in this respect is also not clear. PURPOSE The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of an adhesive system-cement combination, the heat-pressing technique, and thermomechanical aging on the retention force between titanium bases and PEEK specimens. MATERIAL AND METHODS Sixty 9×11×20-mm PEEK specimens with a titanium base slot integrated into the design were milled to simulate an implant-supported PEEK framework for a cantilevered fixed prosthesis. The specimens were assigned to 8 groups (n=10) according to the titanium base primer (MKZ or Monobond) and resin cement (DTK or Multilink hybrid) used and with or without thermomechanical aging. Twenty PEEK specimens were directly heat-pressed on titanium bases, and half of the specimens were not subjected to thermomechanical aging (n=10). For nonaged groups, the PEEK specimen complex was tightened to an implant analog and secured on a custom-made pull-off device. Retention forces were measured by using the pull-off tensile test in a universal testing machine, and the maximum tensile bond strength (MPa) was calculated. The aged groups were subjected to 5000 cycles of thermal aging (5 °C to 55 °C), and the specimens were clamped to load the extension (cantilever) for 1 200 000 cycles with 120 N and 200 N at 1.5-Hz frequency. After aging, the pull-off test was performed for those specimens that survived thermomechanical aging. A nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine whether there was a difference among the groups, followed by pairwise Wilcoxon rank tests with Bonferroni correction. The Wilcoxon rank test was used to analyze the effect of thermomechanical aging in each adhesive system-cement or heat-press group (α=.05 for all tests). RESULTS None of the specimens failed during cyclic loading. According to the Kruskal-Wallis test, the effect of the PEEK-Ti base bonding technique on the retention force in the nonaged (P=.019) and thermomechanically aged groups was significant (P=.010). In the nonaged groups, the heat-pressing technique resulted in a higher retention force than when the specimens were bonded by using the Monobond-Multilink hybrid combination (P=.031). Thermomechanical aging did not significantly affect the results (P>.241). All failures were adhesive, with cement remaining only on the Ti-bases. CONCLUSIONS All bonding protocols tested resulted in a stable bond between PEEK and Ti-bases, as all specimens survived thermomechanical aging. The heat-pressing technique resulted in mean bond strength values similar to those obtained with the tested adhesive system-cement combinations with 1 exception; the nonaged heat-pressed groups presented higher bond strength than the Monobond-Multilink hybrid combination. Failure types indicated that the weaker bond was between the PEEK and the cements tested rather than between the titanium base and the cements, regardless of the adhesive system-cement combination

Effect of intraoral scanner and fixed partial denture situation on the scan accuracy of multiple implants: An in vitro study.

BACKGROUND Accuracy of intraoral implant scans may be affected by the region of the implant and the type of the intraoral scanner (IOSs). However, there is limited knowledge on the scan accuracy of multiple implants placed for an implant-supported fixed partial denture (FPD) in different partially edentulous situations when digitized by using different IOSs. PURPOSE To investigate the effect of IOS and FPD situation on the scan accuracy of two implants when partial-arch scans were performed. MATERIALS AND METHODS Tissue level implants were placed in 3 maxillary models with implant spaces either at right first premolar and right first molar sites (Model 1, 3-unit FPD), at right canine and right first molar sites (Model 2, 4-unit FPD), or at lateral incisor sites (Model 3, 4-unit FPD). Reference standard tessellation language (STL) files of the models were generated by using an optical scanner (ATOS Capsule 200MV120). Two IOSs (CEREC Primescan [CP] and TRIOS 3 [TR]) were used to perform partial-arch scans (test-scans) of each model (n = 14), which were exported in STL format. A metrology-grade analysis software (GOM Inspect 2018) was used to superimpose test-scan STLs over the reference STL to calculate 3D distance, inter-implant distance, and angular (mesiodistal and buccopalatal) deviations. Trueness and precision analyses were performed by using bootstrap analysis of variance followed by Welch tests with Holm correction (α = 0.05). RESULTS Trueness of the scans was affected by IOS and FPD situation when 3D distance deviations were considered, while inter-implant distance, mesiodistal angular, and buccopalatal angular deviations were only affected by the FPD situation (p < 0.001). Scan precision was affected by the interaction between the IOSs and the FPD situation when 3D distance and buccopalatal angular deviations were concerned, while IOSs and FPD situation were effective when all deviations were concerned (p≤ 0.001). When 3D distance deviations were considered, CP scans had higher accuracy TR scans in Models 1 and 3 (p ≤ 0.002), and the Model 1 scans had the highest accuracy (p < 0.001). When inter-implant distance deviations were considered, Model 1 scans had the highest accuracy with CP and higher accuracy than Model 2 when TR was used (p ≤ 0.030). When mesiodistal angular deviations were considered, Model 1 scans had the highest accuracy (p ≤ 0.040). When buccopalatal angular deviations were considered, Model 1 scans had the highest accuracy among models when CP was used (p ≤ 0.020). CONCLUSIONS Posterior 3-unit fixed partial denture implant scans, CP scans, and combination of these two factors had accuracy either similar to or better than their tested counterparts

Converting Bilateral Free-End Removable Partial Dentures to Implant-Assisted Removable Partial Dentures Using 6 mm Short Implants: Patient-Reported Outcomes of a Prospective Clinical Study.

The study assessed oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of patients who received two 6 mm short implants in mandibular molar sites, converting existing bilateral free-end removable partial dentures (RPDs) to implant-assisted RPDs (IARPDs). After a postsurgical healing period of 4 months, the participants received a non-retentive dome abutment for 8 weeks, and then a retentive ball abutment for another 8 weeks. Afterwards, the participants made their final choice on which abutment to keep. The final follow-up was 1 year after implant placement. OHRQoL was evaluated with the 49-items version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-49) at the abutment exchanges and the final follow-up. Furthermore, numerical rating scales were used to analyze patient satisfaction after 1 year. Questionnaire data of 13 participants were evaluated. Overall, OHRQoL increased with both the dome (p = 0.02) and the ball abutments (p &lt; 0.001), without a significant difference between the abutments (p = 0.953). The questionnaires revealed an improvement in terms of oral situation, quality of life, and masticatory capacity (all p &lt; 0.01). Patients showed a significant preference for the ball abutments (p &lt; 0.001). Converting RPDs to IARPDs resulted in significant improvement of OHRQoL. Patients seem to prefer retentive over non-retentive abutments, although no differences in terms of OHRQoL were observed

Assessing masticatory performance with a colour-mixing ability test using smartphone camera images

BACKGROUND Colour-mixing ability tests are frequently used to assess masticatory performance, but the image acquisition process may be cumbersome and technique sensitive. OBJECTIVES To evaluate the reliability of smartphone camera images in assessing masticatory performance using a colour-mixing ability test. METHODS Participants were recruited into three groups of dental state (n = 20 each): fully dentate, removable partial denture wearers and complete denture wearers. After performing a colour-mixing ability test, images of the gum specimens (Hue-Check Gum©) were captured with two smartphones and compared with the images obtained from a flatbed scanner by two examiners. The images were analysed with a subjective- (SA) and an opto-electronical assessment (VoH). Inter- and intra-rater reliability were tested. ANOVA models with repeated measures were used for statistical analysis (⍺ = .05). RESULTS All three image acquisition techniques were able to distinguish masticatory performance between different dental states. For SA, inter-rater reliability was fair to substantial and intra-rater reliability was substantial to almost perfect. For VoH, inter-rater reliability with the smartphones was at times different between two examiners, but the intra-rater assessment was reliable. The opto-electronic analysis with smartphone images underestimated the masticatory performance significantly when compared to the flatbed scanner analysis. Seven-day ageing of the specimens did not significantly affect the results. CONCLUSIONS The assessment of masticatory performance with the Hue-Check Gum© is a reliable method. The use of smartphones may occasionally underestimate masticatory performance; image acquisition with a flatbed scanner remains the gold standard. A centralised analysis of the photographed wafer may foster the reliability of the diagnosis

Effect of Scanned Area and Operator on the Accuracy of Dentate Arch Scans with a Single Implant

Studies have shown the effect of the operator and scanned areas on the accuracy of single implant scans. However, the knowledge on the scan accuracy of the remaining dental arch during single implant scans, which may affect the occlusion, is limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of scanned areas and the operator on the scan accuracy of a dentate arch while scanning a single implant. A dentate model with an anterior implant was digitized with a laboratory scanner (reference scan). Three operators with similar experience performed 10 complete- and 10 partial-arch scans (left 2nd molar to right canine) with an intraoral scanner (TRIOS 3), and these scans were superimposed over the reference. The accuracy was analyzed at 22 points in complete-arch and at 16 points in partial-arch scans on 2nd molars and incisors. Data were evaluated with 2-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests (α = 0.05). The trueness of the total scanned area was higher in partial- than in complete-arch scans (p < 0.001). The trueness and precision of the scans were higher in the anterior site compared with the posterior in complete- (trueness: p ≤ 0.022, precision: p ≤ 0.003) and partial-arch (trueness: p ≤ 0.016, precision: p ≤ 0.016) scans of each operator and when the operator scan data were pooled. The complete-arch scan’s precision was not influenced by the operator (p ≥ 0.029), whereas the partial-arch scans of operator 1 and 2 were significantly different (p = 0.036). Trueness was higher in partial- compared with complete-arch scans, but their precision was similar. Accuracy was higher in the anterior site regardless of the scan being a partial- or a complete-arch. The operator’s effect on the accuracy of partial- and complete-arch scans was small

Influence of Alveolar Ridge Morphology and Guide-hole Design on the Accuracy of Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery with two Implant Macro-designs: An in Vitro Study.

OBJECTIVES The primary aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of alveolar ridge morphologies on the accuracy of static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery (sCAIS). The secondary aims were to evaluate the influence of guide-hole design and implant macro-design on the accuracy of the final implant position. METHODS Eighteen standardized partially edentulous maxillary models with two different types of alveolar ridge morphologies were used. Each model was scanned via cone beam computer tomography prior to implant placement and scanned with a laboratory scanner prior to and following implant placement using sCAIS. The postsurgical scans were superimposed on the initial treatment planning position to measure the deviations between planned and postsurgical implant positions. RESULTS Seventy-two implants were equally distributed to the study groups. Implants placed in healed alveolar ridges showed significantly lower mean deviations at the crest (0.36 ± 0.17 mm), apex (0.69 ± 0.36 mm), and angular deviation (1.86 ± 0.99°), compared to implants placed in fresh extraction sites (0.80 ± 0.29 mm, 1.61 ± 0.59 mm, and 4.33 ± 1.87°; all p<0.0001). Implants placed with a sleeveless guide-hole design demonstrated significantly lower apical (1.02 ± 0.66 mm) and angular (2.72 ± 1.93°) deviations compared to those placed with manufacturer's sleeves (1.27 ± 0.67 mm; p=0.01, and 3.46 ± 1.9°; p=0.02). Deep-threaded tapered bone level implants exhibited significantly lower deviations at the crest (0.49 ± 0.28 mm), apex (0.97 ± 0.63 mm), and angular deviations (2.63 ± 1.85°) compared to shallow-threaded parallel-walled bone level implants (0.67 ± 0.34 mm; p=0.0005, 1.32 ± 0.67 mm; p=0.003, and 3.56 ± 1.93°; p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS The accuracy of the final implant position with sCAIS is determined by the morphology of the alveolar ridge, the design of the guide holes, and the macrodesign of the implant. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Higher accuracy in the final implant position was observed with implants placed in healed alveolar ridge morphologies, in implants with deep-threaded tapered macro-design, and when sleeveless surgical guide holes were used