medigraphic.com
ISSN 1561-297X (Print)

2020, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Cubana Estomatol 2020; 57 (2)

Use of intraoral scanners in implantology

Bernardi BL, e Silva CD, Dantas BAU

Language: Portugués
References: 47
Page:
PDF size: 209.92 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Intraoral scanners are devices that emerged as an alternative to conventional impression methods. A variety of studies have been conducted to evaluate the actual effectiveness of this technology and its clinical applicability. Objective: Analyze the results obtained by studies about intraoral scanners in the area of implantology in terms of types, accuracy, working time, and operator and patient preference. Methods: A search was conducted in the databases PubMed and SciELO using the following descriptors: “intraoral AND scanner AND implant”, “digital AND scanner AND implant” and “digital AND impression AND implant” in English, Portuguese and Spanish. The inclusion criteria were the following: clinical or laboratory papers evaluating the use of digital implant scanning technique, full access to the paper, written in Portuguese, English or Spanish and published as of the year 2013. Data analysis and integration: Of the 158 papers obtained and analyzed, 35 were selected: 28 laboratory and 7 clinical. Despite the limitations in the standardization of the studies, we perceive the potential and viability of the digital technique, with favorable clinical and accuracy results, as well as advantages such as a reduction in work time and stages, dynamic communication with laboratories, preference by patients and dental students and ease of technical incorporation by experienced dentists. Conclusions: Laboratory studies indicate that, in addition to the advantages concerning the use of impression materials, communication with laboratories and ease of manipulation, the digital technique may achieve better results than conventional impression techniques. The use of intraoral scanners is therefore a promising technique for the area of ​​implantology. However, further studies should be conducted, especially in vivo, to evaluate the consistency of the clinical results obtained.


REFERENCES

  1. Peres MA, Barbato PR, Reis SCGB, Freitas CHS de M, Antunes JLF. Perdas dentárias no Brasil: análise da Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde Bucal 2010. Rev Saude Publica. 2013 Dec;47(suppl 3):78-89.

  2. Carlsson GE, Omar R. The future of complete dentures in oral rehabilitation. A critical review. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37(2):143-6.

  3. Soto-Penaloza D, Zaragozi-Alonso R, Penarrocha-Diago M, Penarrocha-Diago M. The all-on-four treatment concept: Systematic review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2017 Mar;9(3):e474-e488.

  4. Pjetursson BE, Zarauz C, Strasding M, Sailer I, Zwahlen M, Zembic A. A systematic review of the influence of the implant-abutment connection on the clinical outcomes of ceramic and metal implant abutments supporting fixed implant reconstructions. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29:160-83.

  5. Turkyilmaz I, Company AM, McGlumphy EA. Should edentulous patients be constrained to removable complete dentures? the use of dental implants to improve the quality of life for edentulous patients. Gerodontology. 2010;27(1):3-10.

  6. Ministério da Saúde (BR). Secretaria de Atenção a Saúde. Portaria no 718, de 20 de dezembro de 2010. Diário Oficial da União. 2010. p. Seção1:100-3.

  7. Driscoll CF, Freilich MA, Guckes AD, Knoernschild KL, Mcgarry TJ. The Glossary of Prosthodontic Terms. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 May;117(5):e1-e105.

  8. Rodrigues RA, Rodrigues R de QF, Barros HP, Dias AH de M, Batista AUD. Avaliação in vitro entre diferentes técnicas e métodos de união de transferentes de moldagem utilizados na implantodontia. Pesqui Bras Odontopediatria Clin Integr. 2010;10(2):285-90.

  9. Bhakta S, Vere J, Calder I, Patel R. Impressions in implant dentistry. Br Dent J. 2011 Oct;211(8):361-7.

  10. Khatri JM, Tated G. Failures in dental implantology - A Literature Review. J Appl Dent Med Sci. 2015;1(1):55-62.

  11. Lee H, So JS, Hochstedler JL, Ercoli C. The accuracy of implant impressions: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2008 Oct;100(4):285-91.

  12. Giménez B, Pradíes G, Martínez-Rus F, Özcan M. Accuracy of two digital implant impression systems based on confocal microscopy with variations in customized software and clinical parameters. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015 Jan;30(1):56-64.

  13. Andriessen FS, Rijkens DR, van der Meer WJ, Wismeijer DW. Applicability and accuracy of an intraoral scanner for scanning multiple implants in edentulous mandibles: A pilot study. J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Mar;111(3):186-94.

  14. Ribeiro P, Herrero-Climent M, Díaz-Castro C, Ríos-Santos JV, Padrós R, Mur JG, et al. Accuracy of implant casts generated with conventional and digital impressions-an in vitro study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jul 27;15(8):1599.

  15. Gherlone EF, Ferrini F, Crespi R, Gastaldi G, Capparé P. Digital impressions for fabrication of definitive all-on-four; restorations. Implant Dent. 2015 Feb;24(1):125-9.

  16. Joda T, Lenherr P, Dedem P, Kovaltschuk I, Bragger U, Zitzmann NU. Time efficiency, difficulty, and operator's preference comparing digital and conventional implant impressions: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Oct;28(10):1318-23.

  17. Flügge TV, Att W, Metzger MC, Nelson K. Precision of dental implant digitization using intraoral scanners. Int J Prosthodont. 2016 May;29(3):277-83.

  18. Menini M, Setti P, Pera F, Pera P, Pesce P. Accuracy of multi-unit implant impression: traditional techniques versus a digital procedure. Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Apr 30;22(3):1253-62.

  19. Pesce P, Pera F, Setti P, Menini M. Precision and accuracy of a digital impression scanner in full-arch implant rehabilitation. Int J Prosthodont. 2018 Mar;31(2):171-5.

  20. Wong KY, Esguerra RJ, Chia VAP, Tan YH, Tan KBC. Three-dimensional accuracy of digital static interocclusal registration by three intraoral scanner systems. J Prosthodont. 2018 Feb;27(2):120-8.

  21. Amin S, Weber HP, Finkelman M, El Rafie K, Kudara Y, Papaspyridakos P. Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Nov;28(11):1360-7.

  22. Chew AA, Esguerra RJ, Teoh KH, Wong KM, Ng SD, Tan KB. Three-Dimensional Accuracy of Digital Implant Impressions: Effects of different scanners and implant level. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017 Jan;32(1):70-80.

  23. Fukazawa S, Odaira C, Kondo H. Investigation of accuracy and reproducibility of abutment position by intraoral scanners. J Prosthodont Res. 2017 Oct;61(4):450-9.

  24. Giménez B, Hassan B, Özcan M, Pradíes G. An in vitro study of factors influencing the performance of digital intraoral impressions operating on active wavefront sampling technology with multiple implants in the edentulous maxilla. J Prosthodont. 2017 Dec;26(8):650-5.

  25. Imburgia M, Logozzo S, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Mangano C, Mangano FG. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2017 Jun 2;17(1):17-92.

  26. Vandeweghe S, Vervack V, Dierens M, De Bruyn H. Accuracy of digital impressions of multiple dental implants: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Jun;28(6):648-53.

  27. Alshawaf B, Weber H-P, Finkelman M, El Rafie K, Kudara Y, Papaspyridakos P. Accuracy of printed casts generated from digital implant impressions versus stone casts from conventional implant impressions: A comparative in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Aug;29(8): 835-842.

  28. Marghalani A, Weber H-P, Finkelman M, Kudara Y, El Rafie K, Papaspyridakos P. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for partially edentulous arches: An evaluation of accuracy. J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Apr;119(4):574-9.

  29. Alikhasi M, Siadat H, Nasirpour A, Hasanzade M. Three-dimensional accuracy of digital impression versus conventional method: effect of implant angulation and connection type. Int J Dent. 2018 Jun 4;2018:3761750.

  30. Mangano FG, Veronesi G, Hauschild U, Mijiritsky E, Mangano C. Trueness and precision of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: A comparative in vitro study. Papaccio G, editor. PLoS One 2016 Sep 29;11(9):e0163107.

  31. Papaspyridakos P, Gallucci GO, Chen C-JJ, Hanssen S, Naert I, Vandenberghe B. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Apr;27(4):465-72.

  32. Chia VA, Esguerra RJ, Teoh KH, Teo JW, Wong KM, Tan KB. In vitro three-dimensional accuracy of digital implant impressions: the effect of implant angulation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 2017 Mar;32(2):313-21.

  33. Zitzmann NU, Kovaltschuk I, Lenherr P, Dedem P, Joda T. Dental students' perceptions of digital and conventional impression techniques: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Dent Educ. 2017 Oct 1;81(10):1227-32.

  34. Patzelt SBMM, Lamprinos C, Stampf S, Att W. The time efficiency of intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparative study. J Am Dent Assoc. 2014 Jun;145(6):542-51.

  35. Lee SJ, Macarthur IV RX, Gallucci GO, Macarthur RX, Gallucci GO. An evaluation of student and clinician perception of digital and conventional implant impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2013 Nov;110(5):420-3.

  36. Koch GK, Gallucci GO, Lee SJ. Accuracy in the digital workflow: From data acquisition to the digitally milled cast. J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Jun;115(6):749-54.

  37. Basaki K, Alkumru H, De Souza G, Finer Y. Accuracy of digital vs conventional implant impression approach: a three-dimensional comparative in vitro analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017 Jul;32(4):792-9.

  38. Lin WS, Chou JC, Metz MJ, Harris BT, Morton D. Use of intraoral digital scanning for a CAD/CAM-fabricated milled bar and superstructure framework for an implant-supported, removable complete dental prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent 2015 Jun;113(6):509-15.

  39. Giménez B, Özcan M, Martínez-Rus F, Pradíes G. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on active wavefront sampling technology for implants considering operator experience, implant angulation, and depth. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Jan;17:e54-64.

  40. Ajioka H, Kihara H, Odaira C, Kobayashi T, Kondo H. Examination of the position accuracy of implant abutments reproduced by intra-oral optical impression. Bencharit S, editor. PLoS One. 2016 Oct 5;11(10):e0164048.

  41. Moura RV, Kojima AN, Saraceni CHC, Bassolli L, Balducci I, Özcan M, et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital impression techniques for implant restorations. Journal of Prosthodontics. 2019 Feb;28(2):e530-e535.

  42. Lee SJ, Betensky RA, Gianneschi GE, Gallucci GO. Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Jun;26(6):715-9.

  43. Alsharbaty MHM, Alikhasi M, Zarrati S, Shamshiri AR. A clinical comparative study of 3-dimensional accuracy between digital and conventional implant impression techniques. J Prosthodont. 2019 Apr;28(4):e902-e908.

  44. Gherlone E, Capparé P, Vinci R, Ferrini F, Gastaldi G, Crespi R. Conventional versus digital impressions for "all-on-four" restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016 Mar;31(2):324-30.

  45. Schepke U, Meijer HJAA, Kerdijk W, Cune MS. Digital versus analog complete-arch impressions for single-unit premolar implant crowns: Operating time and patient preference. J Prosthet Dent. 2015 Sep;114(3):403-406.e1.

  46. Joda T, Brägger U. Patient-centered outcomes comparing digital and conventional implant impression procedures: a randomized crossover trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Dec;27(12):e185-9.

  47. Wismeijer D, Mans R, van Genuchten M, Reijers HA. Patients' preferences when comparing analogue implant impressions using a polyether impression material versus digital impressions (Intraoral Scan) of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014 Oct ;25(10):1113-8.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com