-
All Events
IAO-EAO-SIdP joint meeting 2024EAO-DGI joint meeting 202329th Annual Scientific CongressEAO Digital Days 2021EAO Digital Days 202028th Annual Scientific Congress27th Annual Scientific Congress26th Annual Scientific Congress25th Annual Scientific Congress24th Annual Scientific Congress23rd Annual Scientific Congress -
All Content TypesAbstractArticle ReviewePosterLearning moduleLearning QuizMatching SlidePDF DocumentWebcast
-
Sort ByRelevance
Background
Digital impressions taken by an intraoral scanner is a method that is increasingly been used instead of conventional impression methods.The use of this kind of impressions could improve the patient experience, reduce the margin of error caused by traditional impression taking, reduce the treatment time, and improve the comunication with the dental laboratory.
Aims
The purpouse of this study is to to get the conclusions to which the routine use, in a dental clinic, of the intraoral scanner as a method to take impressions needed to carry out prosthetic treatments, either on teeth or implants, has led us.
Methods
From march 2015 to march 2017, 106 clinical cases were restored with implant prostheses at Clinica Beltrán. The digital impressions were taken by an intraoral scanner (TRUE DEFINITION, 3M) in order to complete the prosthetic fixed restorations. 56 of them were single restorations, 45 were partial restorations from 2 to 4 units, and 5 of the cases were full arch rehabilitations.Three of the prostheses were designed virtually and elaborated without a physical model(they were zirconium monolitic restorations), while the rest of the restorations were made using a printed stereolithographic model. All the restorations were CAD-CAM.We checked, for each restoration, the scannig time, the feelings of the patients, the punctuality of the deliveries, as well as the complications arisen, and the need to send the work back to the laboratory for corrections. The accuracy and precisión of the restorations were also evaluated.
Results
106 clinical cases were restored with a fixed prostheses. The estereolitographic models where checked with a verification jig in the cases involving partial restorations or full arch rehabilitations. In three of the five cases of full arch rehabilitation, some of the implant analogs had to be relocated because the position wasn´t right.We had some problems with the estereolitigraphic model in five cases. The most of the problems happened with the first cases (usually vertical malposition of the analogs), possibly due to the learning curve of the lab. technicians.The procedure time needed to take the digital impressions was smaller than the time needed using conventional procedures.In single and partial restorations, the total treatment time decreased because of the minor need of adjustments and because in the 82% of the patients, only one appointment was needed to deliver the prostheses. From the patient point of view, the scannig process has better acceptance than the conventional impression methods.
Conclusions
Within the limitations of our study, we conclude that the intraoral scanner is a feasible option to take impressions in implant prostheses, when treating cases including single or partial restorations. In this situations, digital impressions improve the patient experience, enhance the workflow, and reduce number of appointmets and the treatment time. However, this kind of impressions are still not accurate enough when we are dealing with full-arch rehabilitations.
Background
Digital impressions taken by an intraoral scanner is a method that is increasingly been used instead of conventional impression methods.The use of this kind of impressions could improve the patient experience, reduce the margin of error caused by traditional impression taking, reduce the treatment time, and improve the comunication with the dental laboratory.
Aims
The purpouse of this study is to to get the conclusions to which the routine use, in a dental clinic, of the intraoral scanner as a method to take impressions needed to carry out prosthetic treatments, either on teeth or implants, has led us.
Methods
From march 2015 to march 2017, 106 clinical cases were restored with implant prostheses at Clinica Beltrán. The digital impressions were taken by an intraoral scanner (TRUE DEFINITION, 3M) in order to complete the prosthetic fixed restorations. 56 of them were single restorations, 45 were partial restorations from 2 to 4 units, and 5 of the cases were full arch rehabilitations.Three of the prostheses were designed virtually and elaborated without a physical model(they were zirconium monolitic restorations), while the rest of the restorations were made using a printed stereolithographic model. All the restorations were CAD-CAM.We checked, for each restoration, the scannig time, the feelings of the patients, the punctuality of the deliveries, as well as the complications arisen, and the need to send the work back to the laboratory for corrections. The accuracy and precisión of the restorations were also evaluated.
Results
106 clinical cases were restored with a fixed prostheses. The estereolitographic models where checked with a verification jig in the cases involving partial restorations or full arch rehabilitations. In three of the five cases of full arch rehabilitation, some of the implant analogs had to be relocated because the position wasn´t right.We had some problems with the estereolitigraphic model in five cases. The most of the problems happened with the first cases (usually vertical malposition of the analogs), possibly due to the learning curve of the lab. technicians.The procedure time needed to take the digital impressions was smaller than the time needed using conventional procedures.In single and partial restorations, the total treatment time decreased because of the minor need of adjustments and because in the 82% of the patients, only one appointment was needed to deliver the prostheses. From the patient point of view, the scannig process has better acceptance than the conventional impression methods.
Conclusions
Within the limitations of our study, we conclude that the intraoral scanner is a feasible option to take impressions in implant prostheses, when treating cases including single or partial restorations. In this situations, digital impressions improve the patient experience, enhance the workflow, and reduce number of appointmets and the treatment time. However, this kind of impressions are still not accurate enough when we are dealing with full-arch rehabilitations.
Background
Digital impressions taken by an intraoral scanner is a method that is increasingly been used instead of conventional impression methods.The use of this kind of impressions could improve the patient experience, reduce the margin of error caused by traditional impression taking, reduce the treatment time, and improve the comunication with the dental laboratory.
Aims
The purpouse of this study is to to get the conclusions to which the routine use, in a dental clinic, of the intraoral scanner as a method to take impressions needed to carry out prosthetic treatments, either on teeth or implants, has led us.
Methods
From march 2015 to march 2017, 106 clinical cases were restored with implant prostheses at Clinica Beltrán. The digital impressions were taken by an intraoral scanner (TRUE DEFINITION, 3M) in order to complete the prosthetic fixed restorations. 56 of them were single restorations, 45 were partial restorations from 2 to 4 units, and 5 of the cases were full arch rehabilitations.Three of the prostheses were designed virtually and elaborated without a physical model(they were zirconium monolitic restorations), while the rest of the restorations were made using a printed stereolithographic model. All the restorations were CAD-CAM.We checked, for each restoration, the scannig time, the feelings of the patients, the punctuality of the deliveries, as well as the complications arisen, and the need to send the work back to the laboratory for corrections. The accuracy and precisión of the restorations were also evaluated.
Results
106 clinical cases were restored with a fixed prostheses. The estereolitographic models where checked with a verification jig in the cases involving partial restorations or full arch rehabilitations. In three of the five cases of full arch rehabilitation, some of the implant analogs had to be relocated because the position wasn´t right.We had some problems with the estereolitigraphic model in five cases. The most of the problems happened with the first cases (usually vertical malposition of the analogs), possibly due to the learning curve of the lab. technicians.The procedure time needed to take the digital impressions was smaller than the time needed using conventional procedures.In single and partial restorations, the total treatment time decreased because of the minor need of adjustments and because in the 82% of the patients, only one appointment was needed to deliver the prostheses. From the patient point of view, the scannig process has better acceptance than the conventional impression methods.
Conclusions
Within the limitations of our study, we conclude that the intraoral scanner is a feasible option to take impressions in implant prostheses, when treating cases including single or partial restorations. In this situations, digital impressions improve the patient experience, enhance the workflow, and reduce number of appointmets and the treatment time. However, this kind of impressions are still not accurate enough when we are dealing with full-arch rehabilitations.
Background
Digital impressions taken by an intraoral scanner is a method that is increasingly been used instead of conventional impression methods.The use of this kind of impressions could improve the patient experience, reduce the margin of error caused by traditional impression taking, reduce the treatment time, and improve the comunication with the dental laboratory.
Aims
The purpouse of this study is to to get the conclusions to which the routine use, in a dental clinic, of the intraoral scanner as a method to take impressions needed to carry out prosthetic treatments, either on teeth or implants, has led us.
Methods
From march 2015 to march 2017, 106 clinical cases were restored with implant prostheses at Clinica Beltrán. The digital impressions were taken by an intraoral scanner (TRUE DEFINITION, 3M) in order to complete the prosthetic fixed restorations. 56 of them were single restorations, 45 were partial restorations from 2 to 4 units, and 5 of the cases were full arch rehabilitations.Three of the prostheses were designed virtually and elaborated without a physical model(they were zirconium monolitic restorations), while the rest of the restorations were made using a printed stereolithographic model. All the restorations were CAD-CAM.We checked, for each restoration, the scannig time, the feelings of the patients, the punctuality of the deliveries, as well as the complications arisen, and the need to send the work back to the laboratory for corrections. The accuracy and precisión of the restorations were also evaluated.
Results
106 clinical cases were restored with a fixed prostheses. The estereolitographic models where checked with a verification jig in the cases involving partial restorations or full arch rehabilitations. In three of the five cases of full arch rehabilitation, some of the implant analogs had to be relocated because the position wasn´t right.We had some problems with the estereolitigraphic model in five cases. The most of the problems happened with the first cases (usually vertical malposition of the analogs), possibly due to the learning curve of the lab. technicians.The procedure time needed to take the digital impressions was smaller than the time needed using conventional procedures.In single and partial restorations, the total treatment time decreased because of the minor need of adjustments and because in the 82% of the patients, only one appointment was needed to deliver the prostheses. From the patient point of view, the scannig process has better acceptance than the conventional impression methods.
Conclusions
Within the limitations of our study, we conclude that the intraoral scanner is a feasible option to take impressions in implant prostheses, when treating cases including single or partial restorations. In this situations, digital impressions improve the patient experience, enhance the workflow, and reduce number of appointmets and the treatment time. However, this kind of impressions are still not accurate enough when we are dealing with full-arch rehabilitations.