Which clinical and laboratory procedures should be used to fabricate digital complete dentures? A systematic review

IF 4.3 2区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.07.027

Khaing Myat Thu BDS, DipDSc, PhD , Pedro Molinero-Mourelle Dr med dent, PhD , Andy Wai Kan Yeung BDS, PhD , Samir Abou-Ayash Prof, Dr med dent , Walter Yu Hang Lam BDS, MDS(Pros), AdvDipProsth, FHKAM, FCDSHK, MFDS (RCSEd), MFDS (RCPSG), FDS (RCSEd), FDS (RCPSG), MPros RCSEd, FRACDS

{"title":"Which clinical and laboratory procedures should be used to fabricate digital complete dentures? A systematic review","authors":"Khaing Myat Thu BDS, DipDSc, PhD , Pedro Molinero-Mourelle Dr med dent, PhD , Andy Wai Kan Yeung BDS, PhD , Samir Abou-Ayash Prof, Dr med dent , Walter Yu Hang Lam BDS, MDS(Pros), AdvDipProsth, FHKAM, FCDSHK, MFDS (RCSEd), MFDS (RCPSG), FDS (RCSEd), FDS (RCPSG), MPros RCSEd, FRACDS","doi":"10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.07.027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Statement of problem</h3><div>Digital workflows for digital complete denture fabrication have a variety of clinical and laboratory procedures, but their outcomes and associated complications are currently unknown.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical and laboratory procedures for digital complete dentures, their outcomes, and associated complications.</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>Electronic literature searches were conducted on PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for studies published from January 2000 to September 2022 and screened by 2 independent reviewers. Information on digital complete denture procedures, materials, their outcomes, and associated complications was extracted.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of 266 screened studies, 39 studies were included. While 26 assessed definitive complete dentures, 7 studies assessed denture bases, 2 assessed trial dentures, and 4 assessed the digital images only. Twenty-four studies used border molded impression technique, 3 studies used a facebow record, and 7 studies used gothic arch tracing. Only 13 studies performed trial denture placement. Twenty-one studies used milling, and 17 studies used 3D printing for denture fabrication. One study reported that the retention of maxillary denture bases fabricated from a border-molded impression (14.5 to 16.1 N) was statistically higher than the retention of those fabricated from intraoral scanning (6.2 to 6.6 N). The maximum occlusal force of digital complete denture wearers was similar across different fabrication procedures. When compared with the conventional workflow, digital complete dentures required statistically shorter clinical time with 205 to 233 minutes saved. Up to 37.5% of participants reported loss of retention and up to 31.3% required a denture remake. In general, ≥1 extra visit and 1 to 4 unscheduled follow-up visits were needed. The outcomes for patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life were similar between conventional, milled, and 3D printed complete dentures.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Making a border-molded impression is still preferred for better retention, and trial denture placement is still recommended to optimize the fabrication of definitive digital complete dentures.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16866,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","volume":"132 5","pages":"Pages 922-938"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002239132300495X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Statement of problem

Digital workflows for digital complete denture fabrication have a variety of clinical and laboratory procedures, but their outcomes and associated complications are currently unknown.

Purpose

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical and laboratory procedures for digital complete dentures, their outcomes, and associated complications.

Material and methods

Electronic literature searches were conducted on PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for studies published from January 2000 to September 2022 and screened by 2 independent reviewers. Information on digital complete denture procedures, materials, their outcomes, and associated complications was extracted.

Results

Of 266 screened studies, 39 studies were included. While 26 assessed definitive complete dentures, 7 studies assessed denture bases, 2 assessed trial dentures, and 4 assessed the digital images only. Twenty-four studies used border molded impression technique, 3 studies used a facebow record, and 7 studies used gothic arch tracing. Only 13 studies performed trial denture placement. Twenty-one studies used milling, and 17 studies used 3D printing for denture fabrication. One study reported that the retention of maxillary denture bases fabricated from a border-molded impression (14.5 to 16.1 N) was statistically higher than the retention of those fabricated from intraoral scanning (6.2 to 6.6 N). The maximum occlusal force of digital complete denture wearers was similar across different fabrication procedures. When compared with the conventional workflow, digital complete dentures required statistically shorter clinical time with 205 to 233 minutes saved. Up to 37.5% of participants reported loss of retention and up to 31.3% required a denture remake. In general, ≥1 extra visit and 1 to 4 unscheduled follow-up visits were needed. The outcomes for patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life were similar between conventional, milled, and 3D printed complete dentures.

Conclusions

Making a border-molded impression is still preferred for better retention, and trial denture placement is still recommended to optimize the fabrication of definitive digital complete dentures.

查看原文本刊更多论文

制作数字化全口义齿应采用哪些临床和实验室程序？系统综述。

问题陈述：数字化全口义齿制作的数字化工作流程有多种临床和实验室程序，但其结果和相关并发症目前尚不清楚。目的：本系统综述的目的是评估数字化全口义齿的临床和实验室程序、其结果和相关并发症：在 PubMed/Medline、Embase 和 Web of Science 上对 2000 年 1 月至 2022 年 9 月期间发表的研究进行电子文献检索，并由两名独立审稿人进行筛选。提取了有关数字化全口义齿的程序、材料、结果和相关并发症的信息：结果：在筛选出的 266 项研究中，有 39 项被纳入。其中 26 项研究评估了最终全口义齿，7 项研究评估了义齿基托，2 项研究评估了试用义齿，4 项研究仅评估了数字图像。24 项研究使用了边模印模技术，3 项研究使用了面弓记录，7 项研究使用了哥特式牙弓描记。只有 13 项研究进行了义齿试戴。21 项研究使用了铣削技术，17 项研究使用了 3D 打印技术制作义齿。一项研究报告称，根据边界成型印模制作的上颌义齿基托的固位力（14.5 至 16.1 N）在统计学上高于根据口内扫描制作的义齿基托的固位力（6.2 至 6.6 N）。数字全口义齿佩戴者的最大咬合力在不同的制作过程中相似。与传统工作流程相比，数字化全口义齿所需的临床时间明显缩短，节省了205至233分钟。多达 37.5% 的参与者报告了固位丧失，多达 31.3% 的参与者需要重新制作义齿。一般来说，需要≥1次额外就诊和1至4次计划外复诊。在患者满意度和口腔健康相关生活质量方面，传统全口义齿、铣制全口义齿和三维打印全口义齿的结果相似：结论：为获得更好的固位效果，制作边模印模仍是首选，并且仍建议进行义齿试戴，以优化最终数字全口义齿的制作。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

7.00

自引率

13.00%

发文量

599

审稿时长

69 days

期刊介绍： The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is the leading professional journal devoted exclusively to prosthetic and restorative dentistry. The Journal is the official publication for 24 leading U.S. international prosthodontic organizations. The monthly publication features timely, original peer-reviewed articles on the newest techniques, dental materials, and research findings. The Journal serves prosthodontists and dentists in advanced practice, and features color photos that illustrate many step-by-step procedures. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is included in Index Medicus and CINAHL.