Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Is the use of digital technologies for the fabrication of implant-supported reconstructions more efficient and/or more effective than conventional techniques: A systematic Review


Mühlemann, Sven; Kraus, Riccardo D; Hämmerle, Christoph H F; Thoma, Daniel S (2018). Is the use of digital technologies for the fabrication of implant-supported reconstructions more efficient and/or more effective than conventional techniques: A systematic Review. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 29 Suppl:184-195.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To identify clinical studies evaluating efficiency and/or effectiveness of digital technologies as compared to conventional manufacturing procedures for the fabrication of implant-supported reconstructions. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic search from 1990 through July 2017 was performed using the online databases Medline, Embase, and Cochrane-Central-Register-of-Controlled-Trials. Literature on efficiency and/or effectiveness during the impression session, the manufacturing process, and the delivery session were included. RESULTS In total, 12 clinical studies were included. No meta-analysis was performed due to a large heterogeneity of the study protocols. Nine publications reported on posterior single implant crowns (SIC) and three on full-arch reconstructions. Mean impression time with intraoral scanners ranged between 6.7 and 19.8 min, whereas the range for conventional impressions was 8.8 and 18.4 min. In a fully digital workflow (FD-WF) for posterior SIC, mean fabrication time ranged between 46.8 and 54.5 min (prefabricated abutment) and 68.0 min (customized abutment). In a hybrid workflow (H-WF) including a digitally customized abutment and a manual veneering, mean fabrication time ranged between 132.5 and 158.1 min. For a conventional porcelain-fused-to-metal-crown, a mean time of 189.8 min was reported. The mean time for the delivery of posterior SIC ranged between 7.3 and 7.4 min (FD-WF), 10.5 and 12.5 min (H-WF), and 15.3 min (conventional workflow, C-WF). The FD-WF for posterior SIC was more effective than the H-/C-WF. CONCLUSIONS The implementation of the studied digital technologies increased time efficiency for the laboratory fabrication of implant-supported reconstructions. For posterior SIC, the model-free fabrication, the use of prefabricated abutments, and the monolithic design was most time efficient and most effective.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To identify clinical studies evaluating efficiency and/or effectiveness of digital technologies as compared to conventional manufacturing procedures for the fabrication of implant-supported reconstructions. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic search from 1990 through July 2017 was performed using the online databases Medline, Embase, and Cochrane-Central-Register-of-Controlled-Trials. Literature on efficiency and/or effectiveness during the impression session, the manufacturing process, and the delivery session were included. RESULTS In total, 12 clinical studies were included. No meta-analysis was performed due to a large heterogeneity of the study protocols. Nine publications reported on posterior single implant crowns (SIC) and three on full-arch reconstructions. Mean impression time with intraoral scanners ranged between 6.7 and 19.8 min, whereas the range for conventional impressions was 8.8 and 18.4 min. In a fully digital workflow (FD-WF) for posterior SIC, mean fabrication time ranged between 46.8 and 54.5 min (prefabricated abutment) and 68.0 min (customized abutment). In a hybrid workflow (H-WF) including a digitally customized abutment and a manual veneering, mean fabrication time ranged between 132.5 and 158.1 min. For a conventional porcelain-fused-to-metal-crown, a mean time of 189.8 min was reported. The mean time for the delivery of posterior SIC ranged between 7.3 and 7.4 min (FD-WF), 10.5 and 12.5 min (H-WF), and 15.3 min (conventional workflow, C-WF). The FD-WF for posterior SIC was more effective than the H-/C-WF. CONCLUSIONS The implementation of the studied digital technologies increased time efficiency for the laboratory fabrication of implant-supported reconstructions. For posterior SIC, the model-free fabrication, the use of prefabricated abutments, and the monolithic design was most time efficient and most effective.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
3 citations in Web of Science®
2 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

67 downloads since deposited on 15 Nov 2018
67 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:October 2018
Deposited On:15 Nov 2018 12:29
Last Modified:16 Nov 2018 04:12
Publisher:Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.
ISSN:0905-7161
OA Status:Green
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13300
PubMed ID:30306680

Download

Download PDF  'Is the use of digital technologies for the fabrication of implant-supported reconstructions more efficient and/or more effective than conventional techniques: A systematic Review'.
Preview
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 1MB
View at publisher
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)
Download PDF  'Is the use of digital technologies for the fabrication of implant-supported reconstructions more efficient and/or more effective than conventional techniques: A systematic Review'.
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 1MB