This systematic review explores the accuracy of computerized guided implant placement including computer-aided static, dynamic, and robot-assisted surgery. An electronic search up to February 28, 2023, was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases using the search terms “surgery”, “computer-assisted”, “dynamic computer-assisted”, “robotic surgical procedures”, and “dental implants”. The outcome variables were discrepancies including the implant’s 3D-coronal, -apical and -angular deviations. Articles were selectively retrieved according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the data were quantitatively meta-analysed to verify the study outcomes. Sixty-seven articles were finally identified and included for analysis. The accuracy comparison revealed an overall mean deviation at the entry point of 1.11 mm (95% CI: 1.02–1.19), and 1.40 mm (95% CI: 1.31–1.49) at the apex, and the angulation was 3.51˚ (95% CI: 3.27–3.75). Amongst computerized guided implant placements, the robotic system tended to show the lowest deviation (0.81 mm in coronal deviation, 0.77 mm in apical deviation, and 1.71˚ in angular deviation). No significant differences were found between the arch type and flap operation in cases of dynamic navigation. The fully-guided protocol demonstrated a significantly higher level of accuracy compared to the pilot-guided protocol, but did not show any significant difference when compared to the partially guided protocol. The use of computerized technology clinically affirms that operators can accurately place implants in three directions. Several studies agree that a fully guided protocol is the gold standard in clinical practice.

Surface modifications for titanium, a material of choice for dental implants, can greatly alter the surface micro/nanotopography and composition of implants, leading to notable enhancements in their hydrophilicity, mechanical properties, osseointegration performance, and antibacterial performance, as well as their impacts on osteoblast activity and bone formation processes. This article aims to update titanium surface modification techniques for dental implants from the past to the present, along with their effects on osteoblasts and bone formation, by thoroughly summarizing findings from published studies. Peer-reviewed articles published in English consisting of in vitro, in vivo, and clinical studies on titanium dental implant surface treatments were searched in Google Scholar, PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, and the Scopus databases from January 1983 to December 2023 and included in this review. The previous studies show that implant surface roughness, condition, and hydrophilicity are crucial for osteoblast adhesion and growth. While various techniques enhance osseointegration comparably, one of the most common approaches to accomplishing these properties is sandblasting large-grit acid etching surface treatment and coating with hydroxyapatite or chitosan. In conclusion, this review points out the efficacy of different subtraction and addition techniques in enhancing the surface properties of titanium dental implants, promoting favorable outcomes in terms of osteoblast activity and bone formation in various degrees. However, most existing studies predominantly compare treated and non-treated titanium, revealing a need for more comprehensive studies comparing the effects of various modification techniques. Moreover, further investigation of factors playing a role in the dynamic osseointegration process in addition to osteoblasts and their functions, as well as improved surface modification techniques for the treatment of compromised patients, is greatly required.

Objective. The wear behavior of the novel zirconia generation is less well understood and may be affected by compositional modifications compared to the conventional zirconia. Materials and Methods. Combinations of keywords such as “zirconia,” “high translucent,” and “wear” were searched in PubMed and Google Scholar databases up to May 2021. The total of 23 relevant articles was selected according to inclusion criteria. Results. Reports show comparable wear resistance of translucent zirconia to the conventional zirconia despite an increased cubic phase content and lower mean flexural strength. A meticulously polished surface creates the lowest surface roughness, producing favorable zirconia wear resistance and antagonist wear compared to a glazed surface. In comparison to other ceramic materials, zirconia produces the least wear on an enamel antagonist and almost undetectable wear when opposed by zirconia. Wear when paired against resin materials yields a favorable outcome, whereas wear behavior against a metal antagonist varies with the surface hardness of the metal. Conclusions. All zirconia generations are considered wear‐friendly to all types of antagonists. Nonetheless, comparative studies on antagonist wear opposing zirconia of different compositions are still limited and further investigation is required.

Titanium has been the material of choice for dental implant fixtures due to its exceptional qualities, such as its excellent balance of rigidity and stiffness. Since zirconia is a soft-tissue-friendly material and caters to esthetic demands, it is an alternative to titanium for use in implants. Nevertheless, bone density plays a vital role in determining the material and design of implants. Compromised bone density leads to both early and late implant failures due to a lack of implant stability. Therefore, this narrative review aims to investigate the influence of implant material/design and surgical technique on bone density from both biomechanical and biological standpoints. Relevant articles were included for analysis. Dental implant materials can be fabricated from titanium, zirconia, and PEEK. In terms of mechanical and biological aspects, titanium is still the gold standard for dental implant materials. Additionally, the macro- and microgeometry of dental implants play a role in determining and planning the appropriate treatment because it can enhance the mechanical stress transmitted to the bone tissue. Under low-density conditions, a conical titanium implant design, longer length, large diameter, reverse buttress with self-tapping, small thread pitch, and deep thread depth are recommended. Implant material, implant design, surgical techniques, and bone density are pivotal factors affecting the success rates of dental implant placement in low-density bone. Further study is required to find the optimal implant material for a clinical setting’s bone state.

Customized healing abutments have been introduced in clinical practice along with implant surgery to preserve or create natural-appearing hard and soft tissue around the implant. This provides the benefits of reducing the overall treatment time by eliminating the second stage and reducing the elapsed time of the fabrication of the final prostheses. This article aims to review the types and properties of materials used for the fabrication of customized healing abutments and their clinical applications. Articles published in English on customized healing abutments were searched in Google Scholar, PubMed/MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, and the Scopus databases up to August 2022. The relevant articles were selected and included in this literature review. Customized healing abutments can be fabricated from materials available for dental implants, including PEEK, PMMA, zirconia, resin composite, and titanium. All the materials can be used following both immediate and delayed implant placement. Each material provides different mechanical and biological properties that influence the peri-implant tissues. In conclusion, the studies have demonstrated promising outcomes for all the materials. However, further investigation comparing the effects of each material on peri-implant soft and hard tissues is required.

Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has become a useful polymeric biomaterial due to its superior properties and has been increasingly used in dentistry, especially in prosthetic dentistry and dental implantology. Promising applications of PEEK in dentistry are dental implants, temporary abutment, implant-supported provisional crowns, fixed prosthesis, removable denture framework, and finger prosthesis. PEEK as a long-term provisional implant restoration has not been studied much. Hence, this review article aims to review PEEK as a long-term provisional implant restoration for applications focusing on implant dentistry. Articles published in English on PEEK biomaterial for long-term provisional implant restoration were searched in Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Scopus. Then, relevant articles were selected and included in this literature review. PEEK presents suitable properties for various implant components in implant dentistry, including temporary and long-term provisional restorations. The modifications of PEEK result in wider applications in clinical dentistry. The PEEK reinforced by 30–50% carbon fibers can be a suitable material for the various implant components in dentistry.