No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Aim: To perform a scoped literature review on advantages of digital workflows in dentistry that could be widely adopted to address safety issues raised during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: Recent studies on any advantages of digital dentistry – as compared to conventional methods – that could help addressing the new safety demands for dental treatments that emerged due to the current pandemic were included. PUBMED, Embase, and Web of Knowledge databases were searched for eligible articles published in the last five years. The guidelines of PRISMA statement were followed during data extraction and evaluation. Results: The present search strategy yielded 181 publications. After application of exclusion criteria, a total of 34 studies were finally considered eligible to be discussed. Among the most important advantages of digital dentistry that contribute to safety during the current pandemic are: reduced number of clinical appointments required, shorter chairside time, less invasive surgeries and safer procedures. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, the findings observed herein suggest that the use of digital workflows in dentistry could lead to increased safety and reduced transmission of COVID-19 during the current pandemic.

Background: Little is known on accuracy comparisons among 3D-printing trueness and precision to produce dental models. The purpose of this study was to investigate the accuracy of different 3D-printing technologies (SLA; DLP; LCD poly and monochromatic; and Polyjet). Methods: Fifteen models were manufactured by the five different 3D printers used in this study. The manufactured models were physically measured in the corresponding lengths for trueness and reproducibility. Means and standard deviations were obtained for the five computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) methods and compared. Results: No significant difference was found in the comparison between observers in all measurements performed with the different model algorithms. Pairwise Wilcoxon non-parametric test comparisons of trueness between 3D-printers revealed statistically significant differences between Stratasys versus Anycubic (p = 0.025) and Anycubic versus Form 2 (p = 0.048). Conclusion: The present findings suggest that the 3D-printing methods may have small significant discrepancies when compared to the original digital files, which may not be clinically relevant. In addition, there were no significant discrepancies among median measurements of each printing method (within 3D-printer analysis), which suggests that, for dental casts, all of the studied devices performed similarly.