Photogrammetric and Intraoral Digital Impression Technique for the Rehabilitation of Multiple Unfavorably Positioned Dental Implants: A Clinical Report

Molinero‐Mourelle, Pedro; Lam, Walter Yu Hang; Cascos, Rocío; Azevedo, Luís; Gómez‐Polo, Miguel

doi:10.1563/aaid-joi-d-19-00140

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The major limit of the intraoral scanner is its high cost. Furthermore, doctors and operators have to learn quite complex skills required to master the machine with confidence [6][7][8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Digital Impression Systems Compared with Traditional Techniques in Dentistry: A Recent Data Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The advent of new technologies in the field of medicine and dentistry is giving improvements that lead the clinicians to have materials and procedures able to improve patients’ quality of life. In dentistry, the last digital techniques offer a fully digital computerized workflow that does not include the standard multiple traditional phases. The purpose of this study is to evaluate all clinical trials and clinical randomized trials related to the digital or dental impression technique in prosthetic dentistry trying to give the readers global information about advantages and disadvantages of each procedure. Data collection was conducted in the main scientific search engines, including articles from the last 10 years, in order to obtain results that do not concern obsolete impression techniques. Elsevier, Pubmed and Embase have been screened as sources for performing the research. The results data demonstrated how the working time appears to be improved with digital workflow, but without a significant result (P = 0.72596). The papers have been selected following the Population Intervention Comparison Outcome (PICO) question, which is related to the progress on dental impression materials and technique. The comparison between dentists or practitioners with respect to classic impression procedures, and students open to new device and digital techniques seem to be the key factor on the final impression technique choice. Surely, digital techniques will end up supplanting the analogical ones altogether, improving the quality of oral rehabilitations, the economics of dental practice and also the perception by our patients.

show abstract

“…The major limit of the intraoral scanner is its high cost. Furthermore, doctors and operators have to learn quite complex skills required to master the machine with confidence [6][7][8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Digital Impression Systems Compared with Traditional Techniques in Dentistry: A Recent Data Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hence, photogrammetry has gradually become popular in clinical practice. The digital file of the 3D position of the implant captured using photogrammetry technology can be superimposed on the soft tissue data acquired by the intraoral scanner to obtain an accurate impression of the edentulous implant 202 . But the combined use of multiple devices also implies that more biases are introduced.…”

Section: Applications Of 3d Imaging Devicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

An overview of three‐dimensional imaging devices in dentistry

Hou

Zhao

et al. 2022

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To review four types of three‐dimensional imaging devices: intraoral scanners, extraoral scanners, cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT), and facial scanners, in terms of their development, technologies, advantages, disadvantages, accuracy, influencing factors, and applications in dentistry. Methods PubMed (National Library of Medicine) and Google Scholar databases were searched. Additionally, the scanner manufacturers' websites were accessed to obtain relevant data. Four authors independently selected the articles, books, and websites. To exclude duplicates and scrutinize the data, they were uploaded to Mendeley Data. In total, 135 articles, two books, and 17 websites were included. Results Research and clinical practice have shown that oral and facial scanners and CBCT can be used widely in various areas of dentistry with high accuracy. Conclusion Although further advancement of these devices is desirable, there is no doubt that digital technology represents the future of dentistry. Furthermore, the combined use of different devices may bring dentistry into a new era. These four devices will play a significant role in clinical utility with high accuracy. The combined use of these devices should be explored further. Clinical significance The four devices will play a significant role in clinical use with high accuracy. The combined use of these devices should be explored further.

show abstract

“…In a randomized clinical trial, Peñarrocha-Diago et al reported that stereophotogrammetric and traditional impressions showed no differences in implant success rate, marginal bone loss, or prosthesis survival after one year of follow-up [27]. In addition, numerous clinical reports also stated that this technique ensures optimum fit of the framework representing a predictable solution for complete implant-supported cases [28][29][30][31][32][33]. Although new technologies are based on the premise of achieving higher quality prosthesis, their direct comparison with digital intraoral scanning is still lacking robust evidence in the literature (specifically with tilted implants) [34][35][36].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Implant Level Intraoral Scanning and Photogrammetry Impression Techniques in a Complete Arch with Angled and Parallel Implants: An In Vitro Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Background: Stereophotogrammetry has recently been investigated showing high accuracy in complete implant supported cases but has scarcely been investigated in cases of tilted implants. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of digital impression techniques (intraoral scanning and photogrammetry) at the level of intraoral scan bodies in terms of angular deviations and 3D discrepancies. (2) Methods: A stone master cast representing an edentulous maxilla using four implant analogs was fabricated. The two anterior implants were parallel to each other, and the two posterior implants were at an angulation of 17 degrees. Digital intraoral scanning (DIOS) impressions were taken after connecting implant level scan bodies to the master cast and STL files were exported (n = 15). Digital photogrammetry (DPG) impressions were captured using a PiC Camera after tightening implant level PiC optical markers and STL files were exported (n = 15). Superimposition was carried out by a software for determining the accuracy of both. (3) Results: Significant angular discrepancies (ΔA) and 3D deviations of scan bodies were found among the groups in trueness with lower deviations for the DPG (p value < 0.001). However, trueness within ISBs varied between angular and 3D deviations and outcomes were not specific to determine the effect of implant angulation. In precision, no significant differences were detected within ISBs and among both groups in terms of angular deviation. However, DPG had less deviations than DIOS group in terms of 3D deviations (p value < 0.001). (4) Conclusion: Digital photogrammetry technique conveyed the utmost accuracy in both trueness and precision for the intraoral scan bodies among both impression methods assessed. In addition, implant angulation did not influence the precision of the impression techniques but affected their trueness without explicit conclusions.

show abstract

Photogrammetric and Intraoral Digital Impression Technique for the Rehabilitation of Multiple Unfavorably Positioned Dental Implants: A Clinical Report

Cited by 15 publications

References 14 publications

3D Digital Impression Systems Compared with Traditional Techniques in Dentistry: A Recent Data Systematic Review

3D Digital Impression Systems Compared with Traditional Techniques in Dentistry: A Recent Data Systematic Review

An overview of three‐dimensional imaging devices in dentistry

Accuracy of Implant Level Intraoral Scanning and Photogrammetry Impression Techniques in a Complete Arch with Angled and Parallel Implants: An In Vitro Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About