Effect of 3D printer, implant analog system, and implant angulation on the accuracy of analog position in implant casts.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accumulative effect of 3D printer, implant analog systems, and implant angulation on the accuracy of analog position in implant casts. METHODS: A reference cast, presenting a case of a three-unit implant-supported prosthesis, was scanned with a coordinate measurement machine, producing the first reference data set (CMM, n = 1). The second reference data set (n = 10) was prepared using an intraoral scanner (IOS) (Trios4). Test quadrant casts were produced using three DLP type 3D printers, Max (MAX UV385), Pro (PRO 4K65 UV), and Nex (NextDent 5100), and three implant analog systems, El (Elos), Nt (Nt-trading), and St (Straumann) (n = 90). Stone casts were also produced via analog impressions (Stone, n = 10). After digitization, the accuracy of 3D distance, local angulation (angle between implants) and global angulation (angle between the implant center axis and an axis perpendicular to the global plane) was evaluated by comparing the reference (CMM, IOS), test (3D print), and control (Stone) groups using metrology software. Data were statistically analyzed using three-way ANOVA and Tukey`s tests (α=0.05). RESULTS: IOS was truer in 3D implant distance and more precise in capturing local angulation than Stone (p ≤ 0.05). Other measurements were similar between both groups (p > 0.05). The amount of error introduced in the workflow by IOS and 3D printing was mostly similar (p > 0.05). 3D printed casts had similar or even higher accuracy than Stone group (p > 0.05). In most cases, higher trueness was achieved when using PRO 4K65 UV 3D printer and Elos implant analog system (p ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSION: 3D printer, implant analog system, and implant angulation have a significant effect on the accuracy of analog position in implant casts. Limited-span implant-supported cases could be reproduced digitally with similar accuracy as conventional methods. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: A fully digital workflow with a carefully selected 3D printer and implant analog system can increase the accuracy of digitally produced implant casts with comparable accuracy to conventional workflow.

Effect of Different Intraoral Scanners on the Accuracy of Bite Registration in Edentulous Maxillary and Mandibular Arches.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to use in vitro models to examine the bite registration accuracy of four different intraoral scanners (IOS) for edentulous maxillary and mandibular arches. The objective was to assess the trueness and precision of the IOS and determine if there were significant differences between them. METHODS: An Asiga Max UV 3D printer was used to print maxillary and mandibular edentulous models based on the shape of Frasaco models (artificial dental arch models). Four dental implants were placed symmetrically in both models using Straumann BLT RC implants. Digital impressions were taken with Primescan, Trios 3, Trios 4, and Medit i500 intraoral scanners (n = 10 for each IOS). Digital bite registrations were made, and scanning data was exported in STL format. The accuracy of the interarch distance (the distance between the metrological spheres attached to the mandibular and maxillary models) was estimated for each IOS. RESULTS: The results showed significant differences in trueness and precision between different IOS (p <.05), except Medit i500 and Trios 3 (p >.05). Primescan provided the most accurate results, followed by Medit i500, Trios 3, and Trios 4, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: within the limitations of this study, the IOS type affects the accuracy of interocclusal bite registration in in vitro design. Only Primescan achieved clinically acceptable accuracy for the interocclusal recording of edentulous arches. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The comparison of the accuracy of bite registration between different intraoral scanners will help increase the efficiency of the clinical application of digitalized interarch registration.

Influence of the Manufacturing Trinomial (Technology, Printer, and Material) on the Marginal and Internal Discrepancies of Printed Metal Frameworks for the Fabrication of Tooth-Supported Prostheses: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the influence of fabrication method (conventional, subtractive, and additive procedures) and manufacturing trinomial (technology, printer, and material combination) on the marginal and internal fit of cobaltchromium (Co-Cr) tooth-supported frameworks. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic systematic review was performed in five data bases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, World of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus. Studies that reported the marginal and internal discrepancies of tooth-supported Co-Cr additive manufacturing (AM) frameworks were included. Two authors independently completed the quality assessment of the studies by applying the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Quasi-Experimental Studies. A third examiner was consulted to resolve lack of consensus. RESULTS: A total of 31 articles were included and classified based on the evaluation method: manufacturing accuracy, the dual- or triple-scan method, stereomicroscope, optical coordinate measurement machine, microCT, profilometer, and silicone replica. Six subgroups were created: 3D Systems, Bego, Concept Laser, EOS, Kulzer, and Sisma. Due to the heterogeneity and limited data available, only the silicone replica group was considered for meta-analysis. The metaanalysis showed a mean marginal discrepancy of 91.09 µm (I2 = 95%, P < .001) in the conventional group, 77.48 µm (I2 = 99%, P < .001) in the milling group, and 82.92 µm (I2 = 98%, P < .001) in the printing group. Additionally, a mean internal discrepancy of 111.29 µm (I2 = 94%, P < .001) was obtained in the conventional casting group, 121.96 µm (I2 = 100%, P < .001) in the milling group, and 121.25 µm (I2 = 99%, P < .001) in the printing group. CONCLUSIONS: Manufacturing method and selective laser melting (SLM) metal manufacturing trinomial did not impact the marginal and internal discrepancies of Co-Cr frameworks for the fabrication of tooth-supported restorations.

Trueness of maxillomandibular relationship in 3D-printed and conventional casts.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the trueness of maxillomandibular relationship between articulated 3D-printed and conventional diagnostic casts in maximum intercuspation (MIP). METHODS: Reference casts were articulated in MIP, and scanned using a Coordinate Measurement Machine (CMM, n = 1). Digital scans were made from the reference casts by using an intraoral scanner (IOS, n = 10) (Trios 4; 3Shape A/S). IOS scans were processed to create 3D-printed casts by using MAX UV385 (Asiga) and NextDent 5100 (3DSystems) 3D-printers. The conventional workflow implemented vinylpolysiloxane (VPS) impressions and Type IV stone. Stone and 3D-printed casts were articulated and digitized with a laboratory scanner (E4; 3Shape A/S). The 3D-printed casts were scanned on two occasions: with and without positioning pins. Inter-arch distances and 3D-contact area were measured and compared. Statistical tests used were Shapiro-Wilk, Levene's, Welch's t-test, and 2-way ANOVA (α=0.05). RESULTS: IOS group showed similar or better maxillomandibular relationship trueness than stone casts and 3D-printed casts (p < 0.05). 3D-contact area analysis showed similar deviations between 3D-printed and stone casts (p > 0.05). The choice of 3D-printer and presence of positioning pins on the casts significantly influenced maxillomandibular relationship trueness (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Articulated 3D-printed and stone casts exhibited similar maxillomandibular relationship trueness. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Although 3D-printing methods can introduce a considerable amount of deviations, the maxillomandibular relationship trueness of articulated 3D-printed and stone casts in MIP can be considered similar.

Trueness of Crown Preparation Dies in Dental Models: An In Vitro Assessment of Digital and Analog Workflows.

PURPOSE: To assess crown die trueness using additive manufacturing (AM) based on intraoral scanning (IOS) data and compare it with stone models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Crown dies with four finish line types- equigingival shoulder (SAE), subgingival shoulder (SAS), equigingival chamfer (CAE), and subgingival chamfer (CAS)-were incorporated into a reference model and scanned with a coordinate measurement machine (CMM; n = 1 scan). Trios4 (3Shape) scans generated a second reference dataset (IOS; n = 10 scans). Using scans, crown dies were produced with two different 3D printers (MAX UV385 [Asiga] and NextDent 5100 [3DSystems]; n = 10 per system). Stone dies were created from conventional impressions (n = 10). Specimens were digitized with a laboratory scanner (E4, 3Shape). Trueness was evaluated with Geomagic Control X (3DSystems). Data analysis was done using Shapiro-Wilk, Levene, ANOVA, and t tests (α < .05). RESULTS: All crown dies fell within the clinically acceptable trueness range (150 µm). IOS exhibited significantly lower (P < .05; Δ ≤ 21.7 µm) or similar trueness compared to stone models. Asiga dies demonstrated similar and NextDent significantly lower marginal trueness than IOS (P < .05; Δ ≤ 57.3 µm). Most AM margin areas had significantly lower trueness than stone (P < .001; Δ ≤ 57.2 µm). Asiga outperformed NextDent (P < .001). Shoulder trueness surpassed chamfer in optical scans (P = .01). Finish line design and gingiva location did not have a significant impact on AM and stone models (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Combining IOS and AM achieves clinically acceptable crown die trueness for single molar teeth. The choice of AM device is critical, with Asiga outperforming NextDent. Finish-line design has an impact on optical scans. Finish-line design and marginal gingiva location have little effect on AM trueness.

Misfit simulation on implant-supported prostheses with different combinations of engaging and nonengaging titanium bases: Part 3: A radiographic evaluation.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The fit of implant-supported prostheses plays an important role in their mechanical and biological stability. Clinically, the prosthetic fit is typically assessed radiographically, but this method relies on the operator's subjective evaluation. Whether available digital tools could optimize the evaluation of the prosthetic fit is uncertain. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of an image processing program on the radiographic detection of discrepancies in the active and passive fit of implant-supported prostheses. Two-implant-supported screw-retained prostheses were analyzed by simulating the vertical and horizontal misfits of 3 different implant abutment configurations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seven casts were fabricated using 2 internal-connection titanium implants: 1 control; 3 with vertical (V) misfit of 50 µm, 100 µm, 150 µm; and 3 with horizontal (H) misfit of 35 µm, 70 µm, 100 µm. Thirty bar-shaped zirconia frameworks were fabricated and divided into 3 groups (n=10) according to their attachment to 2 engaging (E-E), 2 nonengaging (NE-NE), and engaging and nonengaging (E-NE) titanium bases. Digital parallel periapical radiographs were made of each specimen in the passive and active fit situation on each cast (1-screw test), except for the E-E specimens, which were only seated on the control, H35, and H70 casts because the fit on the remaining casts was poor. The mean gray value (MGV) was measured at the chosen regions of interest on the second implant (side B) using the ImageJ software program. Differences in the MGV measurements between the passive and active conditions were tested using a t test (α=.05) and compared the different misfit levels using analysis of variance (1-way ANOVA), followed by the Tukey HSD test (α=.05). RESULTS: The highest values for the differences between passive and active fit were found for the V150 and H100 misfit simulations (P<.05). Statistical differences between the MGVs were found with some exceptions: the smallest simulated misfits (H35 and V50) revealed statistically significant MGV differences from the highest simulated misfits (V150, H100) and from the H70 in the groups where an engaging component was present (P>.05). In the horizontal misfit group of NE-NE abutment configuration, H70 revealed no significant difference from the control group cast (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: Measuring MGV differences between passive and active fit could be a promising alternative for detecting 70- to 150-µm gaps in the implant-abutment connection that result from the misfit. However, the procedure was not adequate for detecting <50 µm gaps, cannot be uniformly applied to all types of implant-abutment connections, and requires 2 exposures to X-radiation.

Repositioning accuracy of the implant- and abutment-level prosthetic components used in conventional and digital workflows.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the repositioning accuracy of the implant- and abutment-level impression components (impression abutments and implant scan bodies) and implant abutments (with and without anti-rotational hex index); also, to estimate the tightening torque influence on the positional stability of abutments. METHODS: Seven types of prosthetic components (n = 7) [impression pick-up copings (PC), implant scan bodies (ISB), non­hex and hex titanium base implant abutments (TB H and TB NH), multi-unit impression copings (MU PC), multi-unit implant scan bodies (MU ISB), and multi-unit caps (MU C) (Medentika GmbH)] were tested. For repositioning accuracy tests a coordinate measuring machine (CMM) was used. During assembly 15 Ncm torque for all components was applied. After measurement, only hex and non­hex abutments were torqued to 25 Ncm and their coordinates were again recorded to assess torque influence. The procedure was repeated 7 times for each component. Linear and 3D deviations, angulation to the vertical axis, and axial rotation were calculated. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the measurements between the groups. A post-hoc test (Mann-Whitney U test) was used for pairwise comparison to determine the influence of the torque (α=0.05). RESULTS: Implant- and abutment-level components used for digital scans showed different positional discrepancies compared to ones used for conventional impressions and ranged from 10 to 37 µm. Hex abutments demonstrated statistically significantly lower 3D deviations (4.4 ± 7.1 µm) compared to non­hex abutments (8.7 ± 6.1 µm). Torque influence was significantly lower for hex abutments than for non­hex abutments. CONCLUSIONS: Repositioning inaccuracies were found in all implant- and abutment-level impression components (impression abutments and implant scan bodies) and all abutments (with and without anti-rotational hex index) tested. Final tightening of the components could cause further positional discrepancies. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The misfit of the prosthetic components used in conventional and digital workflows stays in the clinically acceptable range. Even when multiple connections and disconnections on the track of the laboratory preparation is needed, it should not have a negative influence for single teeth reconstructions. However, in the complex cases with multiple implants, repetitive repositioning of the prosthetic components may lead to the accumulation of vertical, horizontal and rotational errors leading to the clinical problems with the passive fit of the final framework.

Virtual planning, guided surgery, and digital prosthodontics in the treatment of extended mandible chondrosarcoma.

Chondrosarcoma is among the most common primary bone tumors in adults. In the mandible, chondrosarcoma is a very uncommon malignant cartilage-producing tumor. This case report shows how virtual planning combined with other digital technologies may improve masticatory function rehabilitation in patients with enlarged mandibular chondrosarcoma. The present study reports a case of a 52-year-old male patient who was initially diagnosed with a mandible chondroma, which was successfully excised with no evidence of malignant transformation. Nevertheless, the patient's symptoms recurred after 10 years, and a subsequent diagnosis of mandible chondrosarcoma was established, prompting the need for subtotal mandible resection and reconstruction with a fibula-free flap. Following a healing period, the patient underwent dental implant surgery to restore the mandibular dental arch, which was performed utilizing computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing technology, with fully guided implant placement facilitated by virtual planning. In this case report, the implant position data merging process is described from the digital impression and control model to ensure optimal passive fit of the full-arch zirconia prosthesis and discuss the importance of occlusal adjustments to avoid technical and biological complications. Virtual planning and digital technologies are crucial for the effective management of mandibular defects, allowing for accurate treatment and complete restoration of mandibular function. Their use leads to improved patient outcomes and quality of life. As technology advances, their importance in treating complex medical conditions is only expected to grow.

Influence of Kennedy class and number of implants on the accuracy of dynamic implant navigation: An in vitro study using an X-ray free evaluation methodology.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of fully guided dynamic implant navigation surgery in Kennedy I, II, and III class dental arch defects with two different implant designs, using an X-ray free evaluation method. METHODS: Polyurethane resin maxillary models simulated posterior edentulous defects. Four cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans and four intraoral (IOS) scans were obtained for each model and a digital wax-up with the correct implant positions was made. The accuracy of implant positions was evaluated using an IOS-based X-ray-free method (3Shape). Four deviation characteristics were evaluated: insertion point, depth deviation, horizontal and angle deviation. RESULTS: The insertion point deviation measures ranged from 0.19 mm to 1.71 mm. Depth (s) and (u) deviations ranged from -1.47 mm to 0.74 mm and from 0.02 mm to 1.47 mm, respectively. Horizontal deviation ranged from 0.09 mm to 1.37 mm. CONCLUSIONS: There is a tendency of a decreasing insertion point deviation for an increasing number and distribution area of the teeth (increasing Kennedy class number). Kennedy class II and distal implant position had the most influence for the higher deviations. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Dynamic implant guidance provides accurate spacing, angulation, depth and position of the implants. It is important to understand how the number of missing teeth and implant design could influence the accuracy of dynamic implant navigation. Thus, it is important to evaluate factors influencing the accuracy of dynamic systems by using a X-ray-free post-operative method and to overcome the limitations of providing multiple CBCT scans.

Accuracy, scanning time, and patient satisfaction of stereophotogrammetry systems for acquiring 3D dental implant positions: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate accuracy, scanning time, and patient satisfaction of photogrammetry (PG) systems for recording the 3D position of dental implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search was completed in five databases: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, World of Science, and Cochrane. A manual search was also conducted. Studies reporting the use of commercially available PG systems were included. Two investigators evaluated the studies independently by applying the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal. A third examiner was consulted to resolve any lack of consensus. RESULTS: A total of 14 articles were included: 3 in vivo, 6 in vitro, and 6 case report manuscripts. One clinical study evaluated trueness, another one tested precision, and the third one assessed impression time and patient and operator satisfaction. All the in vitro studies evaluated the trueness and precision of a PG system. Additionally, all the reviewed studies investigated completely edentulous conditions with multiple implants. The number of placed implants per arch among the reviewed clinical studies varied from 4 to 8 implants, while the number of implants placed on the reference casts included 4, 5, 6, or 8 implants. Not all the studies compared the accuracy of PG systems with conventional impression methods, using intraoral scanners as additional experimental groups. For the PIC system, trueness ranged from 10 to 49 µm and precision ranged from 5 to 65 µm. For the iCam4D system, trueness ranged from 24 to 77 µm and the precision value ranged from 2 to 203 µm. CONCLUSIONS: PG systems may provide a reliable alternative for acquiring the 3D position of dental implants. However, this conclusion should be interpreted carefully, as one study reported a mean precision value of one PG system higher than the clinically acceptable discrepancy. Lower scanning time and higher patient and operator satisfaction have been reported when compared with conventional techniques. Further studies are needed to increase the evidence regarding the accuracy, scanning time, and patient and operator satisfaction of the commercially available PG systems.

Influence of print orientation on the intaglio surface accuracy (trueness and precision) of tilting stereolithography definitive resin-ceramic crowns.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Vat-polymerization tilting stereolithography (TSLA) technology can be selected for fabricating definitive crowns; however, how the printing variables, including print orientation, influence its manufacturing accuracy remains unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the influence of different print orientations (0, 45, 75, or 90 degrees) on the intaglio surface accuracy (trueness and precision) of TSLA definitive resin-ceramic crowns. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The virtual design of an anatomic contour molar crown was obtained in standard tessellation language (STL) file format and used to manufacture all the specimens by using a TSLA printer (DFAB Chairside) and a resin-ceramic material (Irix Max Photoshade single-use cartridges). Four groups were created depending on the print orientation used to manufacture the specimens: 0- (Group 0), 45- (Group 45), 70- (Group 75), and 90-degree (Group 90) print orientation (n=30). Each specimen was digitized by using a laboratory scanner (T710) according to the manufacturer's scanning protocol. The reference STL file was used as a control to measure the volumetric discrepancies of the intaglio surface with the digitized specimens by using the root mean square (RMS) error calculation. The trueness data were analyzed by using 1-way ANOVA followed by post hoc pairwise multiple comparison Tukey tests, and precision data were analyzed using the Levene test (α=.05). RESULTS: Significant mean trueness (P<.001) and precision (P<.001) value discrepancies were found among the groups tested. Additionally, all the groups were significantly different from each other (P<.001), except for the 45- and 90-degree groups (P=.868). Group 0 showed the best mean trueness and precision values, while the Group 90 demonstrated the lowest mean trueness and precision values. CONCLUSIONS: The print orientations tested influenced the intaglio surface trueness and precision values of the TSLA definitive resin-ceramic crowns.

Scanning accuracy and scanning area discrepancies of intraoral digital scans acquired at varying scanning distances and angulations among 4 different intraoral scanners.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The accuracy of intraoral scanners (IOSs) can be affected by operator handling; however, the scanning area and accuracy discrepancies acquired at different scanning distances and angulations among IOSs remain uncertain. PURPOSE: The objective of this in vitro study was to compare the scanning area and scanning accuracy of the intraoral digital scans obtained at 3 scanning distances with 4 different scanning angulations among 4 different IOSs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A reference device (reference file) was designed with 4 inclinations (0, 15, 30, and 45 degrees) and printed. Four groups were created based on the IOS: i700, TRIOS4, CS 3800, and iTero scanners. Four subgroups were generated depending on the scanning angulation (0, 15, 30, and 45 degrees). Each subgroup was divided into 3 subgroups based on the scanning distance: 0, 2, and 4 mm (N=720, n=15). The reference devices were positioned in a z-axis calibrated platform for standardizing the scanning distance. In the i700-0-0 subgroup, the 0-degree reference device was positioned in the calibrated platform. The wand of the IOS was positioned in a supporting framework with a 0-mm scanning distance, and the scans were acquired. In the i700-0-2 subgroup, the platform was lowered for a 2-mm scanning distance followed by the specimen acquisition. In the i700-0-4 subgroup, the platform was further lowered for a 4-mm scanning distance, and the scans were obtained. For the i700-15, i700-30, and i700-45 subgroups, the same procedures were carried out as in the i700-0 subgroups respectively, but with the 10-, 15-, 30-, or 45-degree reference device. Similarly, the same procedures were completed for all the groups with the corresponding IOS. The area of each scan was measured. The reference file was used to measure the discrepancy with the experimental scans by using the root mean square (RMS) error. Three-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey pairwise comparison tests were used to analyze the scanning area data. Kruskal-Wallis and multiple pairwise comparison tests were used to analyze the RMS data (α=.05). RESULTS: IOS (P<.001), scanning distance (P<.001), and scanning angle (P<.001) were significant factors of the scanning area measured among the subgroups tested. A significant group×subgroup interaction was found (P<.001). The iTero and the TRIOS4 groups obtained higher scanning area mean values than the i700 and CS 3800 groups. The CS 3800 obtained the lowest scanning area among the IOS groups tested. The 0-mm subgroups obtained a significantly lower scanning area than the 2- and 4-mm subgroups (P<.001). The 0- and 30-degree subgroups obtained a significantly lower scanning area than the 15- and 45-degree subgroups (P<.001). The Kruskal-Wallis test revealed significant median RMS discrepancies (P<.001). All the IOS groups were significantly different from each other (P<.001), except for the CS 3800 and TRIOS4 groups (P>.999). All the scanning distance groups were different from each other (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Scanning area and scanning accuracy were influenced by the IOS, scanning distance, and scanning angle selected to acquire the digital scans.

Effect of additional reference objects on accuracy of five intraoral scanners in partially and completely edentulous jaws: An in vitro study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The effect of additional reference objects on the accuracy of different intraoral scanners for partially and completely edentulous patients has not been investigated sufficiently. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of an additional reference object in the form of additional artificial landmarks on the trueness and precision of different intraoral scanners in partially and completely edentulous areas. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Partially and completely edentulous models with 2 and 4 implants (BLT, RC, Institut Straumann AG), respectively, were used in the study. For the digital scan, scan bodies (CARES Mono Scanbody) were attached, and reference data obtained by using industrial scanners. Ten digital scans of the same model were made with each intraoral scanner: PRIMESCAN, TRIOS 3, TRIOS 4, Carestream 3600, and Medit. Then, additional artificial landmarks were attached, and 10 more intraoral scans were made with each device. Computer-aided design files of the scan bodies were aligned to obtain 3-dimensional surfaces with reference and test scanners. Trueness and precision of distance, angulations, and vertical shift between scan bodies were estimated. The Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon or Student 2-sample t test was applied to estimate statistically significant differences between groups (α=.05). RESULTS: In the partially edentulous model, distance trueness mean ±standard deviation values ranged from -46.7 ±15.4 µm (TRIOS 3) to 392.1 ±314.3 µm (Medit) in models without additional artificial landmarks. When additional artificial landmarks were applied, trueness of distance mean ±standard deviation values ranged between -35 ±13 µm (TRIOS 4) and 117.7 ±232.3 µm (CARESTREAM). Trueness mean ±standard deviation values of angulation varied from -0.0 ±0.5 degrees (CARESTREAM) to 0.2 ±0.0 degrees (PRIMESCAN) without additional artificial landmarks and from 0.0 ±0.2 degrees (TRIOS 3) to 0.4 ±0.5 degrees (CARESTREAM) with additional artificial landmarks. Vertical shift trueness measurements varied from -108 ±47.1 µm (TRIOS 4) to 107.2 ±103.5 µm (Medit) without additional artificial landmarks and from -15.0 ±45.0 µm (CARESTREAM) to -86.9 ±42.1 µm (TRIOS 4) with additional artificial landmarks. The additional artificial landmark technique improved the trueness of all measured parameters for the 5 tested intraoral scanners. No statistically significant differences were found among models with or without additional artificial landmarks, except for Medit in all parameters and PRIMESCAN in angle measurements (P<.05). The best precision for distance was found with TRIOS 3 and with PRIMESCAN for angulation and vertical shift. Larger deviations were observed in the completely edentulous situation. The effect of additional artificial landmarks was limited when the accuracy parameters of digital scans were considered. CONCLUSIONS: Scans with and without additional artificial landmarks of partially edentulous conditions scanned by any of the intraoral scanners tested did not influence precision and trueness, except for Medit i500 in the distance and vertical shift parameters and CARESTREAM3600 in vertical shift. Precision and trueness of digital scans of completely edentulous areas were affected, except for Medit i500 for distance, PRIMESCAN and TRIOS 4 for angle, and all systems except TRIOS 4 for vertical shift precision.

Misfit simulation on implant prostheses with different combinations of engaging and nonengaging titanium bases. Part 1: Stereomicroscopic assessment of the active and passive fit.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Little is known about whether the misfit level of implant-supported screw-retained prostheses can be tolerated when different combinations of engaging and nonengaging titanium bases are used. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to simulate prosthetic workflow distortions (horizontal and vertical) and to evaluate the fit (passive and active) of 2-implant-supported screw-retained zirconia frameworks with 3 different combinations of abutments: both engaging, engaging and nonengaging, and both nonengaging. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The fit of both engaging (n=10), engaging and nonengaging (n=10), and both nonengaging (n=10) 2-implant-supported zirconia frameworks was evaluated on control and definitive casts simulating 50-, 100-, and 150-µm vertical and 35-, 70-, 100-µm horizontal misfit levels. Stereomicroscopy was used to assess the passive fit (1 screw tightened) and active fit (both screws tightened) of the zirconia frameworks. Vertical deviations in the implant and abutment connection (the implant-abutment gap measured vertically) between the implant platform and reference line on the titanium base were measured. The Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (α=.05) were used to compare different implant-supported zirconia specimens on each definitive cast. RESULTS: When 1 screw was tightened, both engaging specimens had higher vertical deviations (ranging from 40.1 to 131.1 µm) in 35- and 70-µm horizontal misfit levels, as compared with engaging and nonengaging (19.8 to 85.1 µm) and both nonengaging (6.6 to 14.3 µm) specimens. Comparing medians of the 100-µm misfit in horizontal (engaging and nonengaging 140.4 µm; both nonengaging 151.6 µm) and vertical (engaging and nonengaging 49.8 µm; both nonengaging 42.6 µm) directions, the horizontal misfits caused larger vertical deviations. When both screws were tightened in 50-, 100-, and 150-µm vertical misfit groups, the vertical gap increase in the engaging and nonengaging specimens was significantly higher than that in both the nonengaging specimens (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: As the level of simulated misfit increased, the vertical gap between the implant and abutment increased. Horizontal misfits were less tolerated than vertical ones and may be more detrimental. Both nonengaging 2-implant-supported zirconia frameworks were found to tolerate the different misfit levels better, followed by engaging and nonengaging and both engaging frameworks.

The Effect of UV Treatment on Surface Contact Angle, Fibroblast Cytotoxicity, and Proliferation with Two Types of Zirconia-Based Ceramics.

UV photofunctionalization of Zirconia-based materials for abutment fabrication is a promising approach that might influence the formation of a sound peri-implant seal, thus promoting long-term soft and hard tissue implant integration. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of UV treatment of test specimens made by two different ZnO2-based ceramic materials on the hydrophilicity, cell cytotoxicity, and proliferation of human gingival fibroblasts (HGFs). Two Zirconia-based materials, high-translucent and ultra-translucent multi-layered Zirconia (Katana, Kuraray Noritake, Japan), were used to prepare a total of 40 specimens distributed in two equally sized groups based on the material (n = 20). The same surface finishing protocol was applied for all specimens, as suggested by the manufacturer. Half the specimens from each group were treated with UV-C light for 48 h. Water contact angle (WCA), fibroblast cytotoxicity, and proliferation were investigated. The WCA values for the high-translucent Zirconia ranged from 69.9° ± 6.4° to 73.7° ± 13.9° for the treated/non-treated specimens and from 79.5° ± 12.8° to 83.4° ± 11.4° for the ultra-translucent multi-layered Zirconia, respectively. However, the difference was insignificant (F(16) = 3.50, p = 0.292). No significant difference was observed for the fibroblast cytotoxicity test. The results for proliferation revealed a significant difference, which was material-dependent (F(8) = 9.58, p = 0.005). We found that UV surface photofunctionalization of ZrO2-based materials alters the human gingival fibroblast cell viability, which might produce favourable results for cell proliferation.

Model-free digital workflow and immediate functional loading of implant-supported monolithic glass-ceramic crowns: A case series.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate surgical and prosthetic outcomes of immediate functional loading of implants with glass-ceramic screw-retained single crowns. METHODS: A total of 22 implants were placed. Within 24 h, functional full-contour glass ceramic crowns were delivered to patients. The amount of attached gingiva, Simplified Oral Hygiene Index Score, bleeding on probing, time after extraction, bone type, implant size, soft tissue thickness, primary stability, a general fit of the restoration, occlusal and proximal contacts were recorded. Restorations were followed-up at 1, 3, and 6 months tracking marginal bone loss (MBL), noting changes in occlusal and interproximal contacts, checking other possible complications. RESULTS: One implant failed and was removed after 4 weeks (95.5% survival rate). The rest of the implants and crowns functioned with no complications during the follow-up period of 6 months. Factors such as time after extraction, bone type, implant size, soft tissue thickness, and primary stability recorded in Ncm and implant stability quotient (ISQ) values, were not associated with MBL (p<0.05). Mean MBL was found to be 0.3 mm (standard deviation = 0.42) mesially and 0.4 mm (standard deviation = 0.66) distally. One distal and one mesial proximal contact were found to be missing at the 6-month check-up appointment. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this study, fully digital workflow without a 3D printed model could be successfully employed for immediate functional loading with single-unit implant-supported crowns. Further studies are needed to obtain long-term results with a larger sample of patients. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Model-free digital workflow and immediate functional loading of implant-supported monolithic glass-ceramic crown might be viable option to restore a single tooth defect.

Misfit simulation on implant prostheses with different combinations of engaging and nonengaging titanium bases. Part 2: Screw resistance test.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Prosthesis fit is 1 of the main factors influencing the success and survival of an implant-supported screw-retained restoration. However, scientific validation of the performance of engaging and nonengaging components in a fixed partial denture (FPD) and the effect of their combinations on the fit of FPDs is lacking. The screw resistance test has been used for the fit assessment of screw-retained FPDs. However, objective assessments by using analog and digital devices are now available. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of engaging and nonengaging components on the fit of screw-retained frameworks, supported by 2 conical connection implants with simulated vertical and horizontal misfits, by performing 2 different screw resistance tests (analog and digital). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty 2-implant-supported bar-shaped zirconia frameworks cemented on two 2-mm titanium bases were fabricated and divided into 3 groups (n=10) according to different abutment combinations: both engaging, engaging and nonengaging, both nonengaging. The fit of each framework was tested on the control cast and on 6 definitive casts simulating 50-, 100-, and 150-µm vertical and 35-, 70-, and 100-µm horizontal misfit levels. The abutment screws were tightened on each implant, and the screw rotation angle was measured both digitally, with a custom-made digital torque wrench and a computer software program, and conventionally, with an analog torque wrench and protractor. Clearly ill-fitting specimens were excluded. The data were statistically analyzed by 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey post hoc test (α=.05). RESULTS: Both engaging specimens on the 100-µm horizontal misfit group and on all vertical misfit groups were clearly ill-fitting and excluded. Statistically significant differences among groups with different combinations of abutments were found (P<.05). The engaging abutments had a higher angle of rotation than the nonengaging abutments on all casts. In the horizontal misfit group, both engaging specimens had the highest angle of rotation, followed by engaging and nonengaging and both engaging specimens. In the vertical misfit group, the engaging and nonengaging specimens had the highest angle of rotation on the side of the engaging abutment. The angle of rotation increased with the increasing level of misfit. CONCLUSIONS: Both nonengaging frameworks showed superiority in misfit tolerance, as the angle of rotation was lower than that of the engaging and nonengaging and both engaging frameworks. Conventional and digital torque wrenches showed similar results.

Error propagation from intraoral scanning to additive manufacturing of complete-arch dentate models: An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate deviation propagation from data acquisition with an intraoral scanner to additive manufacturing of complete-arch dentate models. METHODS: A reference (Ref) mandibular dentate model having 5 precision spheres was scanned with a coordinate measurement machine equipped with a laser scanning head (ALTERA; Nikon) producing a Ni reference data set (n = 1). Digital impressions were taken of the Ref model with intraoral scanner (IOS) (Trios4; 3Shape) with Insane (T4_Imo) and Classic (T4_Cmo) scanning modes (each n = 10). T4_Imo scans were used as a second reference data set and to produce test models with two additive manufacturing (AM) devices (each n = 10): MAX UV385 (Asiga) and NextDent 5100 (3DSystems). As for the control group, dual viscosity vinyl polysiloxane impressions were taken of the Ref model and poured with Type IV dental stone (n = 10). All AM and stone models were scanned with a laboratory scanner (E4; 3Shape). Trueness and precision of linear (intermolar and intercanine width, arch length) and surface deviations were measured between reference (Ni, T4_Imo), test (T4_Cmo, AM), and control (stone) groups using best-fit alignments (Geomagic Control X; 3D Systems). The normality of data and differences between the groups were analyzed using Shapiro-Wilk, Levene's, Mann-Whitney U, Welch's t-test statistical analysis (p<0.05). RESULTS: The accuracy of the IOS impression was not significantly affected by the scanning mode (p>0.05). Stone models showed significantly better trueness than IOS impressions (p<0.05). AM models had higher trueness than IOS Imo digital impressions (p<0.05). The precision of AM models was comparable (linear, p>0.05) or lower (surface, p<0.05) than of IOS Imo digital impressions. Trueness was insignificantly different among the stone and AM models (p>0.05). Higher trueness was achieved by Max UV385 than with Nextdent 5100 (p<0.05). The majority of linear and all surface deviations of IOS impressions and AM models were below 200 µm. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this in vitro study, digital IOS impressions and AM models using the aforementioned equipment have acceptable accuracy for orthodontic and prosthodontic applications when complete-arch dentate records are used. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: IOS and AM devices can have a significant influence on error propagation when applying digital workflow with complete-arch dentate models.

Dental pulp stem cell-derived extracellular matrix: autologous tool boosting bone regeneration.

BACKGROUND AIMS: To facilitate artificial bone construct integration into a patient's body, scaffolds are enriched with different biologically active molecules. Among various scaffold decoration techniques, coating surfaces with cell-derived extracellular matrix (ECM) is a rapidly growing field of research. In this study, for the first time, this technology was applied using primary dental pulp stem cells (DPSCs) and tested for use in artificial bone tissue construction. METHODS: Rat DPSCs were grown on three-dimensional-printed porous polylactic acid scaffolds for 7 days. After the predetermined time, samples were decellularized, and the remaining ECM detailed proteomic analysis was performed. Further, DPSC-secreated ECM impact to mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) behaviour as well as its role in osteoregeneration induction were analysed. RESULTS: It was identified that DPSC-specific ECM protein network ornamenting surface-enhanced MSC attachment, migration and proliferation and even promoted spontaneous stem cell osteogenesis. This protein network also demonstrated angiogenic properties and did not stimulate MSCs to secrete molecules associated with scaffold rejection. With regard to bone defects, DPSC-derived ECM recruited endogenous stem cells, initiating the bone self-healing process. Thus, the DPSC-secreted ECM network was able to significantly enhance artificial bone construct integration and induce successful tissue regeneration. CONCLUSIONS: DPSC-derived ECM can be a perfect tool for decoration of various biomaterials in the context of bone tissue engineering.

Accuracy of Fixed Implant-Supported Dental Prostheses Additively Manufactured by Metal, Ceramic, or Polymer: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: Additive manufacturing (AM) in prosthodontics is used as an alternative to casting or milling. Various techniques and materials are available for the additive manufacturing of the fixed and removable tooth-supported restorations, but there is a lack of evidence on the accuracy of AM fixed implant-supported prostheses. Recent studies investigated the accuracy of ceramic AM prostheses. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the accuracy of additively manufactured metal, ceramic or polymers, and screw- or cement-retained fixed implant-supported prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two calibrated investigators performed an electronic search of relevant publications in the English language following selected PICOS criteria and using a well-defined search strategy (latest search date-1st of June, 2021). Based on the exclusion criteria (no control group, less than five samples per group, 3D printing of the implant abutment part, only subjective evaluation of accuracy, etc.) studies were not included in the review. Quantitative data of accuracy evaluation such as marginal gap, strain analysis, and linear measurements was extracted and interpreted. QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the risk of methodological bias of all included studies. RESULTS: Sixteen in vitro studies were selected for the final analysis. Six of the selected studies evaluated screw-retained restorations and 10 cement-retained implant-supported restorations. Only 4 publications concluded that AM restorations were more accurate than conventionally made (cast or milled) ones. The most common finding was that AM restorations were more accurate than cast and demonstrated less or similar accuracy compared to milled ones (n = 10 studies). Detected marginal discrepancies mean values of the AM prosthesis varied from 23 to more than 200 µm, but most of them were categorized as clinically acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: AM implant-supported fixed prostheses demonstrate similar accuracy compared to conventional and computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing techniques in vitro. Detected inaccuracies of AM restorations do not exceed clinically acceptable limits. Clinical studies with longer follow-up periods are needed to show the reliability of AM prostheses.