No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background The aim of the study is to evaluate the accuracy of a new implant navigation system on two different digital workflows. Methods A total of 18 phantom jaws consisting of hard and non-warping plastic and resembling edentulous jaws were used to stimulate a clinical circumstance. A conventional pilot-drill guide was conducted by a technician, and a master model was set by using this laboratory-produced guide. After cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and 3D scanning of the master models, two different digital workflows (marker tray in CBCT and 3D-printed tray) were performed based on the Digital Imaging Communication in Medicine files and standard tessellation language files. Eight Straumann implants (4.1 mm × 10 mm) were placed in each model, six models for each group, resulting in 144 implant placements in total. Postoperative CBCT were taken, and deviations at the entry point and apex as well as angular deviations were measured compared to the master model. Results The mean total deviations at the implant entry point for MTC (marker tray in CBCT), 3dPT (3d-printed tray), and PDG (pilot-drill guide) were 1.024 ± 0.446 mm, 1.027 ± 0.455 mm, and 1.009 ± 0.415 mm, respectively, and the mean total deviations at the implant apex were 1.026 ± 0.383 mm, 1.116 ± 0.530 mm, and 1.068 ± 0.384 mm. The angular deviation for the MTC group was 2.22 ± 1.54°. The 3dPT group revealed an angular deviation of 1.95 ± 1.35°, whereas the PDG group showed a mean angular deviation of 2.67 ± 1.58°. Although there were no significant differences among the three groups (P > 0.05), the navigation groups showed lesser angular deviations compared to the pilot-drill-guide (PDG) group. Implants in the 3D-printed tray navigation group showed higher deviations at both entry point and apex. Conclusions The accuracy of the evaluated navigation system was similar with the accuracy of a pilot-drill guide. Accuracy of both preoperative workflows (marker tray in CBCT or 3D-printed tray) was reliable for clinical use.

Background The aim of the current study was to comparatively assess the efficiency of three different adjunctive therapy options (cold atmospheric plasma, [CAP], photodynamic therapy [PDT] and chemical decontamination via 35% phosphoric acid gel [PAG]) on decontamination of titanium implant surfaces in-vitro. Materials and methods Implants were inserted in concavities of four mm in depth mimicking a bone defect at the implant recipient site. In each model, two implants were inserted in the fourth and one implant in the third quadrants. After contamination with E. faecalis, the first group has been treated with CAP for 3 min, the second group with 35% PAG (and the third group with PDT. After treatment, quantification of bacterial colonization was assessed by quantification via colony forming units and qualitatively by fluorescence microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. Results With a mean value of 1.24 × 105 CFU/ml, the CAP treated implants have showed the least microorganisms. The highest number of CFU was found after PDT with mean value of 8.28 × 106 CFU/ml. For the implants that were processed with phosphoric acid, a mean value of 3.14 × 106 CFU/ml could be detected. When the groups were compared, only the CAP and PDT groups differed significantly from each other (p = 0.005). Conclusion A complete cleaning of the micro-textured implant surface or the killing of the bacteria could not be achieved by any of the investigated treatment options, thus bacteria in the microstructure of the titanium surface cannot be completely reached by mechanical and physico-chemical processes. Clinical relevance The main goal of the adjunctive peri-implantitis treatment is the decontamination of the implant surface. However, there is still an ongoing need to define the most appropriate adjunctive therapy method. Due to its antimicrobial effects, CAP combined with mechanical debridement could be a feasible treatment modality in the management of peri-implantitis.