Background: The objective of this study was to compare conventional versus digital impressions for Full-Arch maxillary rehabilitations. Methods: Patients selected for this study were treated with full-arch screw-retained rehabilitations supported by six immediately loaded dental implants. Patients have been scheduled randomly into control (conventional impression group, CIG) and test (digital impression group, DIG) groups respectively for a fully conventional workflow and a fully digital workflow. In both groups, within 24 h, temporary prostheses were delivered. Four months after the implant positioning, the two groups dealt with the fabrication of definitive restorations: conventional pick-up was performed in the control group, and definitive digital impressions were carried out in the test group. The time involved following these two procedures was recorded. Patients underwent intraoral digital radiographs to evaluate the accuracy of the framework-implant connection, check for the presence of voids at the bar-implant connection and measure bone level. Criteria used to assess success at the prosthetic level were the occurrence of prosthetic maintenance, the absence of fractures of the acrylic resin superstructure and voids. Results: A total of 50 patients received immediately loaded prostheses supported by six implants (total 300 implants). A fixture and prosthetic survival rate of 100% was observed. All digital X-ray examinations revealed a bar-implant connection accuracy and no voids. Differences that were not statistically significant (p > 0.05) in marginal bone loss were found between control and test groups. Significantly less time was spent to perform digital impression procedure (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Clinical and radiological results of the test group advocate a satisfactory accuracy and predictability of the intraoral scanner (IOS) to be a reliable alternative in clinical practice for implant full-arch rehabilitations and suggest fabrication of definitive restorations with a successful marginal fit precision.

No abstract

Objectives Mortality on the dental chair is a rare and underreported event. This study aimed to identify all deaths that occurred during dental procedures in Italy. Methods We searched PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Internet archives looking for patients who died before, during, or after a dental procedure in Italy from 1990 to 2019. Results All the 36 identified fatal events were reported by national or regional newspapers, and none was reported by scientific databases. Interestingly, no cases regarding patients ≤16 years old were found and there was no variation in the number of reported deaths over the years. Most of the cases (n = 29) occurred in out‐of‐hospital private dental offices. Tooth extraction represented the most frequent culprit operation (39%), while myocardial infarction (28%) was the leading cause of death, followed by cardiac arrest (25%), allergies (11%), and infections (8%). In four cases, death was preprocedural, in 10 intraprocedural and in 21 postprocedural. In 17 cases, a temporal association between injection of anesthesia/sedation and death was observed. Conclusion This is the first report on Italian dental procedure‐related deaths. Most of these deaths were only temporally associated with a dental procedure and could not to be attributed to malpractice.