Group 5 ITI Consensus Report: Digital technologies

Abstract

Objectives: Working Group 5 was assigned the task to review the current knowledge in the area of digital technologies. Focused questions on accuracy of linear measurements when using CBCT, digital vs. conventional implant planning, using digital vs.conventional impressions and assessing the accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS) and patient-related outcome measurements when using s-CAIS were addressed. Materials and methods:The literature was systematically searched, and in total, 232 articles were selected and critically reviewed following PRISMA guidelines. Four systematic reviews were produced in the four subject areas and amply discussed in the group. After emendation, they were presented to the plenary where after further modification, they were accepted.Results: Static computer-aided surgery (s-CAIS), in terms of pain & discomfort, economics and intraoperative complications, is beneficial compared with conventional implant surgery. When using s-CAIS in partially edentulous cases, a higher level of accuracy can be achieved when compared to fully edentulous cases. When using an intraoral scanner in edentulous cases, the results are dependent on the protocol that has been followed. The accuracy of measurements on CBCT scans is software dependent. Conclusions:Because the precision intraoral scans and of measurements on CBCT scans and is not high enough to allow for the required accuracy, s-CAIS should be considered as an additional tool for comprehensive diagnosis, treatment planning, and surgical procedures. Flapless s-CAIS can lead to implant placement outside of the zone of keratinized mucosa and thus must be executed with utmost care. K E Y W O R D Saccuracy, computer-aided surgery, cone beam computed tomography, intraoral scans, oral implantology, patient-reported outcome measures sidering standardized conditions, and (b) it is crucial to address the software version and used scan protocol for further studies to create a reliable database for accurate statistical analyses.Although in clinical practice, single unit restorations are being performed using a digital workflow, there is a need for further research to conclude if it is a predictable and reliable procedure when compared to the conventional workflow.• There is a lack of literature about the accuracy of different intraoral scan bodies in terms of geometry, dimension, material, and surface characteristics. More studies regarding these aspects should be conducted.• In studies using scan bodies, design, and characteristics should be defined to make studies comparable.• Regarding multiple implant-supported restorations for partially dentate or edentulous cases, different scanning protocols should be developed and compared.The influence of distance between scan bodies, length and geometry of the edentulous span, mucosal morphology, and on the accuracy of digital impressions should be studied.The aim of this systematic review was to identify studies that assessed the accuracy of linear measurements of bone dimensions related to implant...

Digital Versus Conventional Full‐Arch Implant Impressions: A Prospective Study on 16 Edentulous Maxillae

“…Digital dental technology has recently gained considerable popularity and is being incorporated into the workflow of both fixed and implant prosthodontics 1,2 . The current applications of digital technology in fixed implant rehabilitation include three‐dimensional (3D) diagnostic imaging and related digital implant treatment planning, digitally‐planned template‐guided implant placement, digital scans and computer‐assisted design/computer‐assisted manufacturing (CAD/CAM) of interim and definitive implant prostheses 3‐8 …”

“…While digital planning, template‐guided surgery and CAD/CAM technology are established and routinely used in clinical practice, 3‐8 digital implant scans are considered relatively new to the implant‐prosthodontic field 2 . For partially edentulous patients, the use of digital scans is constantly increasing for indications of single or multiple adjacent implants 9‐13 .…”

Analysis of trends in implant therapy at a surgical specialty clinic: Patient pool, indications, surgical procedures, and rate of early failures—A 15‐year retrospective analysis

“…Flapless implant placement in combination with sCAIS increased in the study period, but was still at a low level. The tendency to use this surgical technique with clearly reduced invasiveness developed during the third observation period, and was driven by improvements in understanding the accuracy and predictability of CAIS procedures (El Kholy, Lazarin, et al, ; El Kholy, Ebenzer, et al, ; El Kholy, Janner, Schimmel, & Buser, ; Wismeijer et al, ). The growing popularity of digital impressions and digital treatment planning will certainly result in a further increase in the digital workflow for implant treatment planning and CAIS procedures in the future.…”

Die digitale Abformung in der implantatprothetischen Behandlung

“…Alternative Ansätze zur Darstellung des Emergenzprofils während der digitalen Abformung durch Verwendung von individualisierten Scanbodies sind mittlerweile auch beschrieben worden [24]. Auch die ITI-Konsensuskonferenz hat sich 2018 mit dem Thema digitale Technologien in der Implantologie beschäftigt [26]. Hier wurden für die digitale Abformung von Implantaten folgende klinische Empfehlungen ausgesprochen: 1.…”