Cargando…

Comparison of conventional and digital workflow for dental rehabilitation with a novel patient-specific framework implant system: an experimental dataset evaluation

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of a digital workflow by comparing the accuracy of prosthetic teeth positioning between virtual standard-size digitally constructed and conventional dental laboratory-fabricated prostheses. METHODS: Twenty-five computed tomography datasets with a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Spalthoff, Simon, Borrmann, Mandy, Jehn, Philipp, Rahlf, Björn, Gellrich, Nils-Claudius, Korn, Philippe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8786984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35072825
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00405-7
_version_ 1784639262997610496
author Spalthoff, Simon
Borrmann, Mandy
Jehn, Philipp
Rahlf, Björn
Gellrich, Nils-Claudius
Korn, Philippe
author_facet Spalthoff, Simon
Borrmann, Mandy
Jehn, Philipp
Rahlf, Björn
Gellrich, Nils-Claudius
Korn, Philippe
author_sort Spalthoff, Simon
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of a digital workflow by comparing the accuracy of prosthetic teeth positioning between virtual standard-size digitally constructed and conventional dental laboratory-fabricated prostheses. METHODS: Twenty-five computed tomography datasets with a dentate upper jaw were selected after applying inclusion criteria to 100 random datasets obtained from the institutional library, and partially edentulous maxillae were constructed virtually. Digital datasets of temporary prostheses were fabricated on these virtually constructed edentulous maxillae in two ways: one dataset comprised prostheses that were fabricated conventionally using prosthetic teeth and wax in the dental laboratory and then scanned using a model scanner, whereas the other dataset was designed virtually using standardized virtual dental arches. The digital datasets of both prostheses were compared for differences at six dental-based measurement points with the original patient dentition. RESULTS: Overall, the conventional design pathway was more accurate than the digital one (conventional 2.915 ± 1.388 mm, digital 3.609 ± 2.052 mm, P < 0.001). However, when all six measurement points were evaluated individually, only three points showed significant differences in the tooth positions. Compared with the original dentition, the deviations were less in the anterior teeth region than in the molar region, fulfilling the esthetic expectations of the patients. Standardized virtual dental arches were practically adequate because virtual reconstruction of every edentulous case using these virtual arches was possible without any additional modifications. CONCLUSION: It is possible to fabricate clinically acceptable temporary prostheses using a comprehensive digital workflow based on standardized digital dental arches.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8786984
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87869842022-02-02 Comparison of conventional and digital workflow for dental rehabilitation with a novel patient-specific framework implant system: an experimental dataset evaluation Spalthoff, Simon Borrmann, Mandy Jehn, Philipp Rahlf, Björn Gellrich, Nils-Claudius Korn, Philippe Int J Implant Dent Research PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of a digital workflow by comparing the accuracy of prosthetic teeth positioning between virtual standard-size digitally constructed and conventional dental laboratory-fabricated prostheses. METHODS: Twenty-five computed tomography datasets with a dentate upper jaw were selected after applying inclusion criteria to 100 random datasets obtained from the institutional library, and partially edentulous maxillae were constructed virtually. Digital datasets of temporary prostheses were fabricated on these virtually constructed edentulous maxillae in two ways: one dataset comprised prostheses that were fabricated conventionally using prosthetic teeth and wax in the dental laboratory and then scanned using a model scanner, whereas the other dataset was designed virtually using standardized virtual dental arches. The digital datasets of both prostheses were compared for differences at six dental-based measurement points with the original patient dentition. RESULTS: Overall, the conventional design pathway was more accurate than the digital one (conventional 2.915 ± 1.388 mm, digital 3.609 ± 2.052 mm, P < 0.001). However, when all six measurement points were evaluated individually, only three points showed significant differences in the tooth positions. Compared with the original dentition, the deviations were less in the anterior teeth region than in the molar region, fulfilling the esthetic expectations of the patients. Standardized virtual dental arches were practically adequate because virtual reconstruction of every edentulous case using these virtual arches was possible without any additional modifications. CONCLUSION: It is possible to fabricate clinically acceptable temporary prostheses using a comprehensive digital workflow based on standardized digital dental arches. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8786984/ /pubmed/35072825 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00405-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research
Spalthoff, Simon
Borrmann, Mandy
Jehn, Philipp
Rahlf, Björn
Gellrich, Nils-Claudius
Korn, Philippe
Comparison of conventional and digital workflow for dental rehabilitation with a novel patient-specific framework implant system: an experimental dataset evaluation
title Comparison of conventional and digital workflow for dental rehabilitation with a novel patient-specific framework implant system: an experimental dataset evaluation
title_full Comparison of conventional and digital workflow for dental rehabilitation with a novel patient-specific framework implant system: an experimental dataset evaluation
title_fullStr Comparison of conventional and digital workflow for dental rehabilitation with a novel patient-specific framework implant system: an experimental dataset evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of conventional and digital workflow for dental rehabilitation with a novel patient-specific framework implant system: an experimental dataset evaluation
title_short Comparison of conventional and digital workflow for dental rehabilitation with a novel patient-specific framework implant system: an experimental dataset evaluation
title_sort comparison of conventional and digital workflow for dental rehabilitation with a novel patient-specific framework implant system: an experimental dataset evaluation
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8786984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35072825
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00405-7
work_keys_str_mv AT spalthoffsimon comparisonofconventionalanddigitalworkflowfordentalrehabilitationwithanovelpatientspecificframeworkimplantsystemanexperimentaldatasetevaluation
AT borrmannmandy comparisonofconventionalanddigitalworkflowfordentalrehabilitationwithanovelpatientspecificframeworkimplantsystemanexperimentaldatasetevaluation
AT jehnphilipp comparisonofconventionalanddigitalworkflowfordentalrehabilitationwithanovelpatientspecificframeworkimplantsystemanexperimentaldatasetevaluation
AT rahlfbjorn comparisonofconventionalanddigitalworkflowfordentalrehabilitationwithanovelpatientspecificframeworkimplantsystemanexperimentaldatasetevaluation
AT gellrichnilsclaudius comparisonofconventionalanddigitalworkflowfordentalrehabilitationwithanovelpatientspecificframeworkimplantsystemanexperimentaldatasetevaluation
AT kornphilippe comparisonofconventionalanddigitalworkflowfordentalrehabilitationwithanovelpatientspecificframeworkimplantsystemanexperimentaldatasetevaluation