Clinical Outcome of Fully Digital Workflow for Single-Implant-Supported Crowns: A Retrospective Clinical Study

A digital workflow by means of intraoral scanners and computer tomography has been used in dental implantology, allowing clinicians to be potentially more accurate and precise. Computer-Aided Design and Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD-CAM) and 3D models facilitate the process from treatment planning to the surgical procedure, up to the implant placement and final prosthesis. The aim of the present retrospective study was to evaluate a fully digital workflow for single-tooth implant rehabilitation. A total of 19 patients (22 implants) were included in the present study, with a mean follow-up time of 2 years. A fully digital workflow was performed on each patient through the planning, design and printing of a surgical guide, following a digital impression made with an intraoral scanner, computer-tomography-guided implant placement and, finally, with the delivery of a CAD-CAM crown. The two-year follow-up results were satisfactory in terms of the aesthetic yield and precision of the prosthesis. In single-implant-supported restorations, due to digital protocols and digital planning, a reduced number of clinical sessions was registered and the treatment plan results were more predictable. Future studies are needed to understand the application of fully digital protocols in cases of partially or totally edentulous patients.

[1]  L. Canullo,et al.  Chairside virtual patient protocol. Part 2: management of multiple face scans and alignment predictability. , 2022, Journal of dentistry.

[2]  A. Giudice,et al.  Usefulness of Magnetic Mallet in Oral Surgery and Implantology: A Systematic Review , 2022, Journal of personalized medicine.

[3]  L. Canullo,et al.  nnnChairside virtual patient protocol. Part 1: Free vs Guided face scan protocol. , 2021, Journal of dentistry.

[4]  P. Khongkhunthian,et al.  Implant-abutment screw removal torque values between customized titanium abutment, straight titanium abutment, and hybrid zirconia abutment after a million cyclic loading: an in vitro comparative study , 2021, International Journal of Implant Dentistry.

[5]  T. Tuna,et al.  Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of implant-supported reconstructions using digital workflows: A systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2021, Clinical oral implants research.

[6]  Muhammad Sohail Zafar,et al.  Fit Accuracy of Removable Partial Denture Frameworks Fabricated with CAD/CAM, Rapid Prototyping, and Conventional Techniques: A Systematic Review , 2021, BioMed research international.

[7]  Kyu-Bok Lee,et al.  Accuracy of Proximal and Occlusal Contacts of Single Implant Crowns Fabricated Using Different Digital Scan Methods: An In Vitro Study , 2021, Materials.

[8]  E. P. Chun,et al.  Analysis of Digital Workflow in Implantology , 2021, Case reports in dentistry.

[9]  C. Grippaudo,et al.  Patient Satisfaction with Implant-Supported Monolithic and Partially Veneered Zirconia Restorations , 2021, BioMed research international.

[10]  Bongju Kim,et al.  Clinical Evaluation of Time Efficiency and Fit Accuracy of Lithium Disilicate Single Crowns between Conventional and Digital Impression , 2020, Materials.

[11]  F. Mangano,et al.  Trueness of 12 intraoral scanners in the full-arch implant impression: a comparative in vitro study , 2020, BMC oral health.

[12]  Hom-lay Wang,et al.  Does a fully digital workflow improve the accuracy of computer-assisted implant surgery in partially edentulous patients? A systematic review of clinical trials. , 2020, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[13]  Kelvin Ian Afrashtehfar,et al.  Marginal and internal adaptation of single crowns and fixed dental prostheses by using digital and conventional workflows: A systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2020, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[14]  D. Doyle,et al.  American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification , 2020 .

[15]  Luigi Canullo,et al.  Trueness of Intraoral Scanners Considering Operator Experience and Three Different Implant Scenarios: A Preliminary Report. , 2020, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[16]  Paolo De Angelis,et al.  Patient and Operator Centered Outcomes in Implant Dentistry: Comparison between Fully Digital and Conventional Workflow for Single Crown and Three-Unit Fixed-Bridge , 2020, Materials.

[17]  D. Buser,et al.  Influence of surgical-guide support and implant site location on accuracy of static Computer Assisted Implant Surgery. , 2019, Clinical oral implants research.

[18]  Giuseppe Troiano,et al.  Digital versus conventional workflow for the fabrication of multiunit fixed prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vertical marginal fit in controlled in vitro studies. , 2019, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[19]  D. Buser,et al.  Influence of implant macrodesign and insertion connection technology on the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgery. , 2019, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[20]  G. Sannino,et al.  Influence of Intra-Oral Scanner (I.O.S.) on The Marginal Accuracy of CAD/CAM Single Crowns , 2019, International journal of environmental research and public health.

[21]  F. Mangano,et al.  A Novel Full-Digital Protocol (SCAN-PLAN-MAKE-DONE®) for the Design and Fabrication of Implant-Supported Monolithic Translucent Zirconia Crowns Cemented on Customized Hybrid Abutments: A Retrospective Clinical Study on 25 Patients , 2019, International journal of environmental research and public health.

[22]  M. Menini,et al.  Soft Tissue Contour Impression with Analogic or Digital Work Flow: A Case Report , 2018, International journal of environmental research and public health.

[23]  C. Coachman,et al.  Fully digital workflow, integrating dental scan, smile design and CAD-CAM: case report , 2018, BMC oral health.

[24]  G. Veronesi,et al.  Digital versus Analog Procedures for the Prosthetic Restoration of Single Implants: A Randomized Controlled Trial with 1 Year of Follow-Up , 2018, BioMed research international.

[25]  C. Mangano,et al.  Clinical applications and effectiveness of guided implant surgery: a critical review based on randomized controlled trials , 2017, BMC oral health.

[26]  L. Bohner,et al.  Patient outcomes and procedure working time for digital versus conventional impressions: A systematic review , 2017, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[27]  M. Ferrari,et al.  The complete digital workflow in fixed prosthodontics: a systematic review , 2017, BMC Oral Health.

[28]  R. Haas,et al.  Immediate Restoration of Immediate Implants in the Esthetic Zone of the Maxilla Via the Copy‐Abutment Technique: 5‐Year Follow‐Up of Pink Esthetic Scores , 2017, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[29]  Z. Sheikh,et al.  Complications in implant dentistry , 2017, European Journal of Dentistry.

[30]  Bassam Hassan,et al.  Registration of cone beam computed tomography data and intraoral surface scans – A prerequisite for guided implant surgery with CAD/CAM drilling guides , 2016, Clinical oral implants research.

[31]  C. Mangano,et al.  From Guided Surgery to Final Prosthesis with a Fully Digital Procedure: A Prospective Clinical Study on 15 Partially Edentulous Patients , 2016, International journal of dentistry.

[32]  Jaafar Abduo,et al.  Fit of CAD/CAM implant frameworks: a comprehensive review. , 2014, The Journal of oral implantology.

[33]  Michael D. Scherer,et al.  Presurgical implant-site assessment and restoratively driven digital planning. , 2014, Dental clinics of North America.

[34]  J. Güth,et al.  Clinical study evaluating the discrepancy of two different impression techniques of four implants in an edentulous jaw , 2013, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[35]  G. Christensen.  Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-office milling. , 2009, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[36]  Adolfo Di Fiore,et al.  Accuracy of 3D digital modeling of dental arches , 2019, Dental press journal of orthodontics.

[37]  J E Zöller,et al.  Possibilities and limitations of implant placement by virtual planning data and surgical guide templates. , 2012, International journal of computerized dentistry.