Implant-supported fixed single prostheses obtained by digital scanning: Systematic review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v12i8.42905Keywords:
Prostheses and implants; Systematic review; Dental implants.Abstract
Intraoral scanning is a viable alternative to be used in implant dentistry. However, the use of this technique is more in evidence in recent years and there is a need for a survey of studies to establish an indication protocol for the correct use of scanners and digital molding. Therefore, this study aims to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis (Cochrane model; PRISMA and PROSPERO: CRD42022313310), in order to analyze the primary studies that evaluated techniques used to obtain moldings in single and partial fixed cases in implant dentistry, using the intraoral scanning system (intervention) compared to the conventional molding system for implant-supported prostheses (comparison). The PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Collaboration, Web of Science and SciELO databases were analyzed using area keywords. The collected data were tabulated and organized qualitatively. Clinical trials were classified according to hierarchy scales. The main results indicated the feasibility of digital scanning when compared to the conventional molding technique for making implant-supported prostheses. In addition, digital flow was associated with shorter clinical procedure time, when compared to conventional molding, greater satisfaction of patients. It is concluded that there is feasibility in the indication and use of intraoral scanning systems to obtain single and multiple implant-supported fixed prostheses. However, no differences were identified between conventional flow vs. digital flow regarding complications and/or failures of prostheses.
References
Ajioka. H., Kihara. H., Odaira. C., Kobayashi, T., & Kondo, H. (2016). Examination of the Position Accuracy of Implant Abutments Reproduced by Intra-Oral Optical Impression. PLoS One.;11(10):e0164048. 10.1371/journal.pone.0164048.
Alsharbaty, M. H. M., Alkhasi, M., Zarrati, S., & Shamshiri, A. R. (2019). A Clinical Comparative Study of 3-Dimensional Accuracy between Digital and Conventional Implant Impression Techniques. J Prosthodont, 28(4), e902-e908.
Assunção, W. G., Filho, H. G., & Zaniquelli, O. (2004). Evaluation of transfer impressions for osseointegrated implants at various angulations. In: Implant Dent. United States. 13, 358-366.
Cappare, P., Sannino, G., Minoli, M., & Montemezzi, P. (2019). Conventional versus Digital Impressions for Full Arch Screw-Retained Maxillary Rehabilitations: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 16(5).
Delize, V., Bouhy A, Lambert F., & Lamy M. (2019). Intrasubject comparison of digital vs. conventional workflow for screw-retained single-implant crowns: Prosthodontic and patient-centered outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res. (9):892-902. 10.1111/clr.13494.
Derksen, W., Tahmaseb, A., & Wismeijer, D. (2021). Randomized Clinical Trial comparing clinical adjustment times of CAD/CAM screw-retained posterior crowns on ti-base abutments created with digital or conventional impressions. One-year follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res. 32(8):962-970. 10.1111/clr.13790.
De Fiore, A., Vigolo P., Graiff L., & Stellini E. (2018). Digital vs Conventional Workflow for Screw-Retained Single-Implant Crowns: A Comparison of Key Considerations. Int J Prosthodont.; 31(6):577-579. 10.11607/ijp.5938.
Gherlone, E., Ferrini, F., Crespi, R., & Gastaldi, G. (2015). Digital impressions for fabrication of definitive "all-on-four" restorations. Implant Dent, 24(1),
Gherlone, E., Cappare, P., Vinci, R., & Ferrini, F. (2016). Conventional Versus Digital Impressions for "All-on-Four" Restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 31(2),. 324-330.
Goiato, M. C., Pellizzer, E. P., Moreno, A., & Gennari-Filho, H. (2014). Implants in the zygomatic bone for maxillary prosthetic rehabilitation: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 43(6), 748-757.
Guo D. N., Liu Y S, Pan S X, Wang P F, Wang B, Liu J Z, Gao W H, & Zhou Y S. (2019). Clinical Efficiency and Patient Preference of Immediate Digital Impression after Implant Placement for Single Implant-Supported Crown. Chin J Dent Res. 22(1):21-28. 10.3290/j.cjdr.a41771.
Higgins, J., & Green, S. (2011). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration. www.cochrane-handbook.org.
Jiang, X., Lin, Y., Cui, H. Y., & Di P. (2019). Immediate loading of multiple splinted implants via complete digital workflow: A pilot clinical study with 1-year follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019 Jun;21(3):446-453. 10.1111/cid.12781.
Joda, T., & Bragger, U. (2016). Patient-centered outcomes comparing digital and conventional implant impression procedures: a randomized crossover trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 27(12):e185-e189. 10.1111/clr.12600.
Joda, T., & Bragger, U. (2015). Time-Efficiency Analysis Comparing Digital and Conventional Workflows for Implant Crowns: A Prospective Clinical Crossover Trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 30(5):1047-53. 10.11607/jomi.3963.
Joda, T., & Bragger, U. (2016). Time-efficiency analysis of the treatment with monolithic implant crowns in a digital workflow: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res.27(11):1401-1406. 10.1111/clr.12753.
Joda, T., Gintaute, A., Bragger, U., Ferrari, M., Weber, K., & Zitzmann, N. U. (2021). Time-efficiency and cost-analysis comparing three digital workflows for treatment with monolithic zirconia implant fixed dental prostheses: A double-blinded RCT. J Dent. 113:103779. 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103779.
Kunavisarut, C., Jarangkul W, Pornprasertsuk-Damrongsri S, & Joda T. (2021). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) comparing digital and conventional workflows for treatment with posterior single-unit implant restorations: A randomized controlled trial. J Dent. 117:103875. 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103875.
Lee, S. J., Jamjoom, F. Z., Le, T., & Radics, A. (2021). A clinical study comparing digital scanning and conventional impression making for implant-supported prostheses: A crossover clinical trial. In: J Prosthet Dent. United States: Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Lopes, L. F., Da Silva, V. F., Santiago, J. F. J., & Panzarini, S. R. (2015). Placement of dental implants in the maxillary tuberosity: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 44(2), 229-238.
Mangano. F., & Veronesi, G. (2018). Digital versus Analog Procedures for the Prosthetic Restoration of Single Implants: A Randomized Controlled Trial with 1 Year of Follow-Up. Biomed Res Int.; 2018:5325032. 10.1155/2018/5325032.
Mangano, F. G., Hauschild, U., Veronesi, G., & Imburgia, M. (2019). Trueness and precision of 5 intraoral scanners in the impressions of single and multiple implants: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health, 19(1), 101.
Pan, S., Guo, D., Zhou, Y., Jung, Re., Hãmmerle, C. H. F., & Muhlemann, S. (2019) Time efficiency and quality of outcomes in a model-free digital workflow using digital impression immediately after implant placement: A double-blind self-controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. (7):617-626. 10.1111/clr.13447.
Papaspyridakos, P., Hirayama, H., Chen, C. J., & Ho, C. H. (2016). Full-arch implant fixed prostheses: a comparative study on the effect of connection type and impression technique on accuracy of fit. Clin Oral Implants Res, 27(9), 1099-1105.
Papaspyridakos, P., Mariano, A., De Souza, A., Kotina, E. (2020). Digital Workflow With a Triple Scanning Technique for Implant Rehabilitation in the Esthetic Zone. Compend Contin Educ Dent, 41(9), e5-e9.
Pera, F., Pesce, P., Bevilacqua, M., & Setti, P. (2016). Analysis of Different Impression Techniques and Materials on Multiple Implants Through 3-Dimensional Laser Scanner. Implant Dent, 25(2), 232-237.
Ren. S., Jiang. X., Lin Y, & Di. P. (2021). Crown Accuracy and Time Efficiency of Cement-Retained Implant-Supported Restorations in a Complete Digital Workflow: A Randomized Control Trial. J Prosthodont.; 31(5):405-411. 10.1111/jopr.13447.
Santiago, J. F. J., De Souza, B. V. E., Verri, F. R., & Honorio, H. M. (2016). Platform-switching implants and bone preservation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 45(3), 332-345.
Sawyers, J., Baig, M. R., & El-Masoud, B. (2019). Effect of Multiple Use of Impression Copings and Scanbodies on Implant Cast Accuracy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 34(4), 891–898.
Yang, X., Liu, Y., Li, Y., Zhao, Y. (2021). Accuracy and feasibility of 3D-printed custom open trays for impressions of multiple implants: A self-controlled clinical trial. In: J Prosthet Dent. United States: Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Nathália Cristina Bortolozzo; Vanessa Machado Buscariolo; Maísa Carnietto; Thiago Amadei Pegoraro; Joel Ferreira Santiago Junior
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
