Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this retrospective cohort study the survival rate, clinical parameters, patient satisfaction with aesthetics and oral health-related quality of life of 3D printed temporary crowns were evaluated. Temporary crowns were 3D printed with a Form3B out of Permanent Crown Resin (Formlabs GmbH). Anonymized data for the restorations’ survival (in-situ) was evaluated retrospectively for 98 temporary crowns of 63 patients fabricated within 19 months. Among these restorations, further analysis was conducted for 42 temporary crowns of 24 patients regarding clinical parameters (modified USPHS criteria), patient satisfaction with aesthetics and impact on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) (OHIP 14). Descriptive statistical analysis (significance level of α = 0.05) included a Kaplan–Meier curve for survival analysis, a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test for USPHS, aesthetics and OHIP data, followed by a Wilcoxon test for USPHS and OHIP data and Chi-squared test for aesthetics data. Cronbach’s alpha was calculated for OHIP data. The average observation period for survival analysis was 256 days. The survival rate was satisfactory at 98% and n = 2 catastrophic failures (i.e. fracture) occurred. Total OHIP scores, with good reliabilities, improved from 6.63 to 2.21 significantly ( p  = 0.005) and patient satisfaction with aesthetics ( p  < 0.001) as well. Clinical analysis with modified USPHS criteria revealed encouraging results.

Axial displacement of prosthetic components is a major concern in implant dentistry, particularly during screw tightening. However, implant manufacturers provide different recommended torques for tightening implant prosthetic components, which can lead to errors in prosthesis fit before and after impression making. Implant–abutment connection angle or abutment geometries can affect axial displacement. This study aimed to compare the axial displacement between conventional and digital components based on the tightening torque and differences in the implant–abutment connection angles and geometries. The results showed that scan bodies with different implant-abutment connection geometries exhibited smaller axial displacement with increasing tightening torque than other prosthetic components. Except for the scan bodies, there was no difference in the axial displacement of prosthetic components when tightened with the same torque. However, regardless of the use of digital or conventional method of impression making, the axial displacement between the impression making component and the abutment when tightened to the recommended torques were significantly different. In addition, axial displacement was affected by the internal connection angle. The results of this study indicate that the tightening torque and geometry of prosthetic components should be considered to prevent possible misfits which can occur before and after impression making.

This study aimed to assess the changes in maxillary master casts that occur during complete denture fabrication, focusing on a compression molded denture. Digital merging techniques were used to measure the changes in 12 maxillary master casts at various fabrication stages. Measurements were performed from master cast formation to teeth arrangement using scanable ball markers and digital overlay techniques. The changes observed in the master cast were categorized as follows: S12 for the alterations from cast fabrication to occlusal rim formation, S23 for the alterations from recording jaw relations to teeth arrangement, and S13 for the overall changes throughout the entire fabrication process. The posterior seal area exhibited the most significant changes, until the jaw relation stage (S12). Statistical analyses revealed significant differences in changes among anatomical areas at different fabrication stages. These findings underscore the importance of considering alterations in the master cast during denture fabrication, when using traditional methods. Traditional techniques, such as the flask-pack-press, can induce substantial alterations in areas critical for denture retention and stability. This study highlights the need for a comprehensive assessment of fabrication processes to enhance denture quality and patient satisfaction. It provides valuable insights into master cast alterations that occur during complete denture fabrication. Efforts to minimize deformations in master casts are essential for improving patient satisfaction and oral health outcomes.

A Commentary on Benzaquen S I, Ardakani M T, Tsigarida A et al . Biologic complications with removable partial dentures assisted by short implants: A 34-month pilot randomized controlled clinical trial. J Prosthet Dent 2025; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.01.026 . Design This single-centre, parallel-arm, pilot randomised controlled clinical trial (RCT) was conducted in accordance with CONSORT guidelines. The primary objective was to compare the incidence of biologic complications between conventional removable partial dentures (CRPDs) and short implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs) in patients with Kennedy Class I bilateral distal-extension edentulism. A secondary objective was to evaluate implant survival and peri-implant outcomes over a mean follow-up period of 34 months. Case selection Thirty-three partially edentulous adult participants (aged 36–87 years) were recruited. Included participants had sufficient bone height to accommodate 6 mm implants without the need for bone augmentation. A strict exclusion criteria included current smoking, uncontrolled diabetes, pregnancy or lactation, and use of immunosuppressive or antiresorptive medications. Random allocation to receive either CRPDs ( n  = 19) or IARPDs supported by two short implants ( n  = 14) was conducted after initial CRPD fabrication. Data analysis Both implant- and non-implant-related biologic complications were recorded at baseline and annual follow-up visits up to four years. Parameters included caries, gingival inflammation, abutment tooth loss, peri-implant mucositis, peri-implantitis, and marginal bone level (MBL) changes. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square tests, Fisher’s exact test and paired and unpaired t-tests, with significance set at p  = 0.05. Results Non-implant biologic complications affected 44.7% of abutment teeth in the CRPD group and 21.4% in the IARPD group; however, this difference was not statistically significant ( p  > 0.05). The most common complications were gingival inflammation and caries. One abutment tooth was lost in the CRPD group versus none in the IARPD group. Peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis were observed in 42.9% and 10.7% of implants, respectively. Implant survival was 81.2%. Most MBL occurred prior to prosthetic loading, with minimal loss thereafter. Conclusions Both CRPDs and IARPDs are viable treatment options for patients with Kennedy Class I edentulism, with no significant difference in the incidence of biologic complications between groups.

Objective This study aims to compare the utilization of intraoral scanners and laboratory scanners as an alternative impression method in fully and partially edentulous cases. Materials and methods This scoping review that implemented the PRISMA-ScR instrument and the methodological approach by Arksey and O’Malley. A comprehensive search was conducted across four databases (PubMed, Scopus, SpringerLink, and ScienceDirect) to retrieve articles published within the last decade. Inclusion criteria were established to identify articles that analyzed the accuracy of both intraoral scanners and laboratory scanners in edentulous cases. Data extraction was performed and results were presented in tables. Subsequently, a thematic analysis was conducted to conclude the accuracy of the intraoral scanners and laboratory scanners in edentulous cases. Results A total of 312 articles were retrieved from four databases. After eliminating duplicates and screening based on titles, abstracts, and eligibility criteria, eight articles were selected for detailed analysis of the accuracy of each technology. Most studies investigated fully and partially edentulous arches and demonstrated the utilization of intraoral scanners and laboratory scanners. Some studies additionally analyzed the correlation between various factors influencing digital scans and the condition of edentulous arch. Evaluations of edentulous digital impressions have been conducted, with an assessment of the reliability of intraoral scanners and laboratory scanners. Conclusion Intraoral scanners are extensively utilized and demonstrate considerable promise for edentulous impression procedures. However, morphological differences may impact scanning outcomes.

This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of digital dental impressions obtained by intraoral scanning (IOS) for partial edentulous patients with maxillary defects by comparing them with conventional impression techniques. Ten subjects underwent an experimental procedure where three ceramic blocks were affixed to the healthy palate mucosa. Digital dental impressions were captured using IOS and subsequently imported into software. Conventional impressions obtained by silicone rubber were also taken and scanned. Linear distance and best-fit algorithm measurements were performed using conventional impression techniques as the reference. Twenty impressions were analyzed, which included 30 pairs of linear distances and 10 best-fit algorithm measurements. Regarding linear distance, paired two-sample t-test demonstrated no significant differences between IOS and model scanning in groups A and C, whereas significant differences were found in group B (P < 0.05). Additionally, ANOVA revealed significant differences among the groups (P < 0.05). No significant differences were found for the best-fit algorithm measurement of the dentition. IOS can provide accurate impressions for partial edentulous patients with maxillary defects and its accuracy was found to be comparable with conventional impression techniques. A functional impression may be needed to ensure accurate reproduction of soft and hard tissues in defect or flap areas.

Denture base fabrication has advanced with the introduction of computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD-CAM) techniques, such as subtractive milling and additive 3D printing. However, concerns persist regarding the mechanical performance of 3D-printed denture bases. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and compare the flexural strength (FS), surface hardness, fracture toughness, and impact strength of 3D-printed denture bases with those produced by milling and conventional methods. A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central was conducted up to March 2025 in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. In vitro studies comparing 3D-printed denture bases with milled or conventional heat-polymerized bases in terms of mechanical properties were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist for quasi-experimental studies was used. Data was extracted, and quantitative synthesis was performed where possible. Thirty-eight studies were included, comprising 562 specimens for FS and 231 for surface hardness. Meta-analysis revealed that milled denture bases demonstrated the highest flexural strength (MD = -1.11, 95% CI [-1.29, -0.93], p  < 0.001) and surface hardness (MD = -26.49, 95% CI [-29.89, -23.10], p  < 0.001) compared to 3D-printed bases. Conventional bases outperformed 3D-printed ones in most mechanical properties. Milled denture bases exhibited the highest FS (120–146 MPa), followed by conventional PMMA (95–119 MPa), while 3D-printed bases showed wider variability (28–128 MPa). Surface hardness (VHN), fracture toughness (MPa·m¹/²), and impact strength (kJ/m²) were also superior in milled bases. Statistical heterogeneity was present due to differences in materials, printing orientation, and post-curing protocols. Subgroup analysis based on printing orientation (0°, 45°, and 90°) partially explained this variability, showing higher FS in horizontally printed specimens. Although 3D-printed denture bases offer customization and production efficiency, their mechanical properties remain inferior to milled alternatives. Optimization of resin formulations, printing parameters, and post-processing protocols is essential to enhance their clinical performance. The main limitations were high heterogeneity among included studies, differences in material formulations, variability in testing standards, and the in vitro nature of most included studies. This review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420250639092). There were no deviations from the registered protocol.

Three-dimensional (3D) printing, otherwise known as additive manufacturing in a non-technical context, is becoming increasingly popular in the field of dentistry. As an essential step in the 3D printing process, postwashing with organic solvents can damage the printed resin polymer and possibly pose a risk to human health. The development of water-washable dental resins means that water can be used as a washing agent. However, the effects of washing agents and washing times on the mechanical and biocompatibility properties of water-washable resins remain unclear. This study investigated the impact of different washing agents (water, detergent, and alcohol) and washing time points (5, 10, 20, and 30 min) on the flexural strength, Vickers hardness, surface characterization, degree of conversion, biocompatibility, and monomer elution of 3D printed samples. Using water for long-term washing better preserved the mechanical properties, caused a smooth surface, and improved the degree of conversion, with 20 min of washing with water achieving the same biological performance as organic solvents. Water is an applicable agent option for washing the 3D printing water-washable temporary crown and bridge resin in the postwashing process. This advancement facilitates the development of other water-washable intraoral resins and the optimization of clinical standard washing guidelines.

The objective was to establish and evaluate a method for manufacture of custom trays for edentulous jaws using computer aided design and fused deposition modeling (FDM) technologies. A digital method for design the custom trays for edentulous jaws was established. The tissue surface data of ten standard mandibular edentulous plaster models, which was used to design the digital custom tray in a reverse engineering software, were obtained using a 3D scanner. The designed tray was printed by a 3D FDM printing device. Another ten hand-made custom trays were produced as control. The 3-dimentional surface data of models and custom trays was scanned to evaluate the accuracy of reserved impression space, while the difference between digitally made trays and hand-made trays were analyzed. The digitally made custom trays achieved a good matching with the mandibular model, showing higher accuracy than the hand-made ones. There was no significant difference of the reserved space between different models and its matched digitally made trays. With 3D scanning, CAD and FDM technology, an efficient method of custom tray production was established, which achieved a high reproducibility and accuracy.

Few investigations have evaluated the 3-dimensional (3D) accuracy of digital implant scans. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of 10 intraoral scanners (IOSs) (CEREC Omnicam, CEREC Primescan, CS 3600, DWIO, i500, iTero Element, PlanScan, Trios 2, Trios 3, and True Definition) in obtaining the accurate positions of 6 cylinders simulating implant scan bodies. Digital scans of each IOS were compared with the reference dataset obtained by means of a coordinate measuring machine. Deviation from the actual positions of the 6 cylinders along the XYZ axes and the overall 3D deviation of the digital scan were calculated. The type of IOSs and position of simulated cylindrical scan bodies affected the magnitude and direction of deviations on trueness. The lowest amount of deviation was found at the cylinder next to the reference origin, while the highest deviation was evident at the contralateral side for all IOSs ( p  < 0.001). Among the tested IOSs, the CEREC Primescan and Trios 3 had the highest trueness followed by i500, Trios 2, and iTero Element, albeit not statistically significant ( p  > 0.05), and the DWIO and PlasScan had the lowest trueness in partially edentulous mandible digital implant scans ( p  < 0.001).