Faculty Bibliography

For dental impression of a prepared tooth, the goal is a void-free negative representation from which an accurate cast of a tooth and its surrounding tissue can be reproduced. This in-vitro study assessed and compared the reproduction accuracies of surface detail obtained with three different dental elastomeric impression materials: vinyl polysiloxane (VPS), vinyl polyether silicone (VPES), and polyether (PE). A stainless-steel model with two abutments was used, with impressions taken 10 times for each material, for 20 abutment impressions per group, using a two-phase, one-step technique (heavy body/light body). The impressions were removed and assessed for numbers of enclosed voids and open voids visible on the surface. The defect frequency was 95% for impressions with the VPS and VPES materials, and 30% for the PE material. No significant differences were seen for number of impressions with defects for VPS versus VPES. Significant differences were seen for VPS and VPES versus the PE material (P <.05). No significant differences were seen for the defect type distributions across these three impression materials. The PE impression material showed better accuracy for reproduction of surface detail of these dental impressions compared to the VPS and VPES impression materials.

Digital dentistry has revolutionized restorative and surgical dental procedures, offering tremendous advantages in clinical efficiency and accuracy. Intraoral optical scanners (IOSs) are just one wayin which this technology has taken form. However, concerns over cross-contamination, calibration requirements, and digital data transfer need to be considered before IOS integration into high-volume dental institutions becomes mainstream.

The purpose of this article is to detail the primary challenges faced by large dental institutions as they incorporate digital dentistry into their mainstream workflow. Integration of digital technology is easier in private practices with smaller patient volumes and fewer trained staff required. Additionally, in private practices, scanning, designing and milling frequently occur in a single location, which does not require an external digital data transfer. However, large dental institutions must overcome several barriers which are uniquely generated by their large-scale operation. Numerous individuals must be comprehensively and efficiently trained to operate the advanced technologies. The digital software must seamlessly integrate with existing software and an internal infrastructure must be established capable of handling massive data inputs. High-volume production in large dental institutions requires the involvement of external laboratories to meet demand. This outsourcing presents a new challenge of safe digital data transfer in accordance with patient privacy and protection regulations set forth by governing agencies. It is vital for large dental institutions to recognise the unique challenges thrust upon them as they attempt to incorporate a digital workflow. With proper forethought and planning an appropriate infrastructure may be established allowing for a smooth and safe transition to the digital era.

No abstract available.

Background/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of this study is to review the available literature associated with implant surgery using computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) surgical guides and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this advanced technique. Material and Methods/UNASSIGNED:An electronic literature search was conducted in the PubMed database for the relevant information on implant placement with CAD/CAM surgical guides. This review was constructed following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Articles were limited to those published within the past 10 years and in the English language. Only clinical studies were included. Inclusion criteria were: studies including 10 implants or more and studies presenting angular deviations in degrees and linear deviations in millimeter. Observational studies, reviews, animal studies, in vitro studies, case reports, simulation studies were excluded. Nine articles were included for qualitative synthesis. Results/UNASSIGNED:The initial search detected 61 articles, and after screening abstracts, a total of 15 articles were selected for full-text review. After the full-text analysis of the 15 articles, six articles were excluded as they did not meet inclusion criteria for study design, study population, and implant placement with data presentation for angular and linear deviations. Ultimately, nine articles providing angular and linear deviations between planned and actual placed implants were used in this review. Common problems that may be encountered by clinicians were listed, and recommendations were made on how to avoid those problems. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:CAD/CAM, CBCT, implant, stereolithography, surgical guide.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The aims of this human cadaver study were to analyze the primary stability of dental implants inserted by using different methods of preparation and to explore correlations among the bone density, peak insertion torque and resonance frequency analysis values. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Forty-eight implants were placed into six human cadaver mandibles. The bone density of each implant recipient site was preoperatively measured by using computerized tomography (CT) in Hounsfield Units (HU). Three test groups were created according to the final drill size. The diameters of the final twist drills were 3 mm, 3.4 mm, and 3.8 mm in group T1, group T2, and group T3, respectively. The peak insertion torque and resonance frequency analysis values were recorded. RESULTS:The mean bone density, insertion torque, and RFA values were 285 ± 90 HU, 42.8 ± 5 Ncm, and 74 ± 6 ISQ for all 48 implants, respectively. Statistically significant correlations were noted between bone density and insertion torque values (P < 0.05), bone density and RFA values (P < 0.01), and insertion torque and RFA values (P < 0.001). When considering the three test groups, the mean insertion torque, and RFA values were 47.1 ± 3 Ncm, and 83.1 ± 6 ISQ in Group T1, and 43.4 ± 5 Ncm and 73.4 ± 6 ISQ in Group T2, and 37.9 ± 6 Ncm, and 65.3 ± 5 ISQ in Group T3. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The results of this study suggest that undersized implant site preparations may be helpful in enhancing primary implant stability and that there are significant correlations among bone density, maximum insertion torque, and RFA values.