Group 2 ITI Consensus Report: Technological developments in implant prosthetics.

OBJECTIVES: Group-2 reviewed the scientific evidence in the field of «Technology¼. Focused research questions were: (1) additive versus subtractive manufacturing of implant restorations; (2) survival, complications, and esthetics comparing prefabricated versus customized abutments; and (3) survival of posterior implant-supported multi-unit fixed dental prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Literature was systematically screened, and 67 publications could be critically reviewed following PRISMA guidelines, resulting in three systematic reviews. Consensus statements were presented to the plenary where after modification, those were accepted. RESULTS: Additively fabricated implant restorations of zirconia and polymers were investigated for marginal/internal adaptation and mechanical properties without clear results in favor of one technology or material. Titanium base abutments for screw-retained implant single crowns compared to customized abutments did not show significant differences concerning 1-year survival. PFM, veneered and monolithic zirconia implant-supported multi-unit posterior fixed dental prostheses demonstrated similar high 3-year survival rates, whereas veneered restorations exhibited the highest annual ceramic fracture and chipping rates. CONCLUSIONS: For interim tooth-colored implant single crowns both additive and subtractive manufacturing are viable techniques. The clinical performance of additively produced restorations remains to be investigated. Implant single crowns on titanium base abutments show similar clinical performance compared to other type of abutments; however, long-term clinical data from RCTs are needed. The abutment selection should be considered already during the planning phase. Digital planning facilitates 3D visualization of the prosthetic design including abutment selection. In the posterior area, monolithic zirconia is recommended as the material of choice for multi-unit implant restorations to reduce technical complications.

Augmented and virtual reality in dental medicine: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to provide an update on the contemporary knowledge and scientific development of augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) in dental medicine, and to identify future research needs to accomplish its clinical translation. METHOD: A modified PICO-strategy was performed using an electronic (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) plus manual search up to 12/2018 exploring AR/VR in dentistry in the last 5 years. Inclusion criteria were limited to human studies focusing on the clinical application of AR/VR and associated field of interest in dental medicine. RESULTS: The systematic search identified 315 titles, whereas 87 abstracts and successively 32 full-texts were selected for review, resulting in 16 studies for final inclusion. AR/VR-technologies were predominantly used for educational motor skill training (n = 9 studies), clinical testing of maxillofacial surgical protocols (n = 5), investigation of human anatomy (n = 1), and the treatment of patients with dental phobia (n = 1). Due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, meta-analyses could not be performed. CONCLUSIONS: The overall number of includable studies was low; and scientifically proven recommendations for clinical protocols could not be given at this time. However, AR/VR-applications are of increasing interest and importance in dental under- and postgraduate education offering interactive learning concepts with 24/7-access and objective evaluation. In maxillofacial surgery, AR/VR-technology is a promising tool for complex procedures and can help to deliver predictable and safe therapy outcomes. Future research should focus on establishing technological standards with high data quality and developing approved applications for dental AR/VR-devices for clinical routine.

Trends in Dental Implant Use in the U.S., 1999-2016, and Projections to 2026.

Dental implants have become an increasingly popular treatment choice for replacing missing teeth. Yet, little is known about the prevalence and sociodemographic distribution of dental implant use in the United States. To address this knowledge gap, we analyzed data from 7 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys from 1999 to 2016. We estimated dental implant prevalence among adults missing any teeth for each survey period overall as stratified by sociodemographic characteristics. We calculated absolute and relative differences from 1999-2000 to 2015-2016 and fit logistic regression models to estimate changes over time. We also used multivariable logistic regression to estimate independent associations of sociodemographic covariates with the presence of any implant. We projected the proportion of patients treated with dental implants into the year 2026 under varying assumptions of how the temporal trend would continue. There has been a large increase in the prevalence of dental implants, from 0.7% in 1999 to 2000 to 5.7% in 2015 to 2016. The largest absolute increase in prevalence (12.9%) was among individuals 65 to 74 y old, whereas the largest relative increase was ~1,000% among those 55 to 64 y old. There was an average covariate-adjusted increase in dental implant prevalence of 14% per year (95% CI, 11% to 18%). Having private insurance (vs. none or public insurance) or more than a high school education (vs. high school or less) was each associated with a 2-fold increase in prevalence, with an almost 13-fold (95% CI, 8 to21) increase for older adults. Dental implant prevalence projected to 2026 ranged from 5.7% in the most conservative scenario to 23% in the least. This study demonstrates that dental implant prevalence among US adults with missing teeth has substantially increased since 1999. Yet access overall is still very low, and prevalence was consistently higher among more advantaged groups.

Success criteria in implant dentistry: a systematic review.

The purpose of this study was to examine the most frequently used criteria to define treatment success in implant dentistry. An electronic MEDLINE/PubMED search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials and prospective studies reporting on outcomes of implant dentistry. Only studies conducted with roughened surface implants and at least five-year follow-up were included. Data were analyzed for success at the implant level, peri-implant soft tissue, prosthetics, and patient satisfaction. Most frequently reported criteria for success at the implant level were mobility, pain, radiolucency, and peri-implant bone loss (> 1.5 mm), and for success at the peri-implant soft-tissue level, suppuration, and bleeding. The criteria for success at the prosthetic level were the occurrence of technical complications/prosthetic maintenance, adequate function, and esthetics during the five-year period. The criteria at patient satisfaction level were discomfort and paresthesia, satisfaction with appearance, and ability to chew/taste. Success in implant dentistry should ideally evaluate a long-term primary outcome of an implant-prosthetic complex as a whole.

Bioengineered periodontal tissue formed on titanium dental implants.

The ability to use autologous dental progenitor cells (DPCs) to form organized periodontal tissues on titanium implants would be a significant improvement over current implant therapies. Based on prior experimental results, we hypothesized that rat periodontal ligament (PDL)-derived DPCs can be used to bioengineer PDL tissues on titanium implants in a novel, in vivo rat maxillary molar implant model. Analyses of recovered implants revealed organized PDL tissues surrounding titanium implant surfaces in PDL-cell-seeded, and not in unseeded control, implants. Rat PDL DPCs also exhibited differentiative potential characteristic of stem cells. These proof-of-principle findings suggest that PDL DPCs can organize periodontal tissues in the jaw, at the site of previously lost teeth, indicating that this method holds potential as an alternative approach to osseointegrated dental implants. Further refinement of this approach will facilitate the development of clinically relevant methods for autologous PDL regeneration on titanium implants in humans.