دورية أكاديمية
Crown adjustment and chairside efficiency of single-unit restorations fabricated from immediate and staged impressions using a digital workflow for posterior implants.
| العنوان: | Crown adjustment and chairside efficiency of single-unit restorations fabricated from immediate and staged impressions using a digital workflow for posterior implants. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Ren S; Department of Oral Implantology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, China., Jiang X; Department of Oral Implantology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, China., Lin Y; Department of Oral Implantology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, China., Di P; Department of Oral Implantology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, China. |
| المصدر: | Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists [J Prosthodont] 2024 Aug; Vol. 33 (7), pp. 637-644. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Mar 25. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article; Comparative Study |
| اللغة: | English |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 9301275 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1532-849X (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 1059941X NLM ISO Abbreviation: J Prosthodont Subsets: MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Publication: Hoboken, NJ : Wiley-Blackwell Original Publication: Philadelphia, PA : W.B. Saunders Co., c1992- |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Crowns* , Dental Impression Technique* , Workflow* , Computer-Aided Design* , Dental Implants, Single-Tooth*, Humans ; Female ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Dental Prosthesis Design/methods ; Adult ; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported ; Occlusal Adjustment |
| مستخلص: | Purpose: This is a clinical study to compare immediate and staged impression methods in a complete digital workflow for single-unit implants in the posterior area. Materials and Methods: Sixty patients requiring single-unit implant crowns were enrolled. Forty patients were assigned to the test group, immediate digital impression after implant surgery with crown delivery 4 months later. The remaining 20 patients were assigned to the control group, staged digital impressions 4 months after implant surgery, and crown delivery 1 month later. Both workflows involved free-model CAD-CAM crown fabrications. The crowns were scanned before and after clinical adjustment using an intraoral scanner (TRIOS Color; 3Shape). Two 3D digital models were trimmed and superimposed to evaluate the dimensional changes using Geomagic Control software. Chairside times for the entire workflow were recorded. Kruskal-Wallis was performed to compare crown adjustments between two groups, while One-way ANOVA was used to compare chairside time durations between the test and control groups. Results: All crowns were delivered without refabrication. The average maximum occlusion adjustment of crowns was -353.2 ± 207.1 μm in the test group and -212.7 ± 150.5 μm in the control group (p = 0.02). The average area of occlusal adjustment, measured as an area of deviation larger than 100 μm, was 14.8 ± 15.3 and 8.4 ± 8.1 mm 2 in the test and control groups, respectively (p = 0.056). There were no significant differences in the mesial and distal contact adjustment amounts, or the maximum deviations of the proximal area, between the two groups. The mean chair-side time was 50.25 ± 13.48 and 51.20 ± 5.34 min in the test and control groups, respectively (p = 0.763). Conclusions: The immediate impression method in the digital workflow for single-unit implants required more occlusal adjustments of crowns but showed similar chairside times compared to the staged impression method. (© 2024 by the American College of Prosthodontists.) |
| References: | Ren S, Jiang X, Lin Y, Di P. Crown accuracy and time efficiency of cement‐retained implant‐supported restorations in a complete digital workflow: a randomized control trial. J Prosthodont. 2022;31(5):405‐411. Joda T, Brägger U. Time‐efficiency analysis of the treatment with monolithic implant crowns in a digital workflow: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27(11):1401‐1406. Zhang Y, Tian J, Wei D, Di P, Lin Y. Quantitative clinical adjustment analysis of posterior single implant crown in a chairside digital workflow: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019;30(11):1059‐1066. Guo DN, Liu YS, Pan SX, Wang PF, Wang B, Liu JZ, et al. Clinical efficiency and patient preference of immediate digital impression after implant placement for single implant‐supported crown. Chin J Dent Res. 2019;22(1):21‐28. Pan S, Guo D, Zhou Y, Jung RE, Hämmerle CHF, Mühlemann S. 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. 2019;30(7):617‐626. Lindskog‐Stokland B, Hansen K, Tomasi C, Hakeberg M, Wennström JL. Changes in molar position associated with missing opposed and/or adjacent tooth: a 12‐year study in women. J Oral Rehabil. 2012;39(2):136‐143. Christou P, Kiliaridis S. Three‐dimensional changes in the position of unopposed molars in adults. Eur J Orthod. 2007;29(6):543‐549. Shugars DA, Bader JD, Phillips SW, White BA, Brantley CF. The consequences of not replacing a missing posterior tooth. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000;131(9):1317‐1323. Wang A, Cao J, Zhang H, Zhang B, Yang G, Hu W, Chung K‑H. Three‐dimensional position changes of unopposed molars before implant rehabilitation: a short‐term retrospective cohort analysis. BMC Oral Health. 2022;22(1):562. Kiliaridis S, Lyka I, Friede H, Carlsson GE, Ahlqwist M. Vertical position, rotation, and tipping of molars without antagonists. Int J Prosthodont. 2000;13(6):480‐486. Gragg KL, Shugars DA, Bader JD, Elter JR, White BA. Movement of teeth adjacent to posterior bounded edentulous spaces. J Dent Res. 2001;80(11):2021‐2024. García‐Herraiz A, Silvestre FJ, Leiva‐García R, Crespo‐Abril F, García‐Antón J. Post‐extraction mesio‐distal gap reduction assessment by confocal laser scanning microscopy—a clinical 3‐month follow‐up study. J Clin Periodontol. 2017;44(5):548‐555. Guo D, Pan S, Mühlemann S, Zhou Y, E Jung R. The migration of neighboring and antagonist teeth three months after implant placement in healed single tooth‐missing sites. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021;32(2):233‐241. Zhang Y, Tian J, Wei D, Di P, Lin Y. Quantitative clinical adjustment analysis of posterior single implant crown in a chairside digital workflow: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019;30:1059‐1066. Joda T, Bragger U. Time‐efficiency analysis comparing digital and conventional workflows for implant crowns: a prospective clinical crossover trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(5):1047‐1053. Zhan D, Xu L, Ouyang Y, Sawatzky R, Wong H. Methods for dealing with unequal cluster sizes in cluster randomized trials: a scoping review. PLoS One. 2021;16(7):e0255389. Kristunas C, Morris T, Gray L. Unequal cluster sizes in stepped‐wedge cluster randomised trials: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2017;7(11):e017151. |
| معلومات مُعتمدة: | PKUSSNCT-19A15 New Clinical Techniques and Therapies of Peking University Hospital of Stomatology; L232111 Beijing Natural Science Foundation |
| فهرسة مساهمة: | Keywords: crown accuracy; digital workflow; immediate digital impression |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20240325 Date Completed: 20240809 Latest Revision: 20240809 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20240809 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/jopr.13851 |
| PMID: | 38526488 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
Full Text Finder | تدمد: | 1532-849X |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1111/jopr.13851 |