Newly introduced provisional crowns and fixed dental prostheses (FDP) materials should exhibit good physical and mechanical properties necessary to serve the purpose of their fabrication. The aim of this systematic literature review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the articles comparing the physical and mechanical properties of 3D-printed provisional crown and FDP resin materials with CAD/CAM (Computer-Aided Designing/Computer-Aided Manufacturing) milled and conventional provisional resins. Indexed English literature up to April 2022 was systematically searched for articles using the following electronic databases: MEDLINE-PubMed, Web of Science (core collection), Scopus, and the Cochrane library. This systematic review was structured based on the guidelines given by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The focused PICO/PECO (Participant, Intervention/exposure, Comparison, Outcome) question was: ‘Do 3D-printed (P) provisional crowns and FDPs (I) have similar physical and mechanical properties (O) when compared to CAD/CAM milled and other conventionally fabricated ones (C)’. Out of eight hundred and ninety-six titles, which were recognized after a primary search, twenty-five articles were included in the qualitative analysis, and their quality analysis was performed using the modified CONSORT scale. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, only twelve articles were included for quantitative analysis. Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that 3D-printed provisional crown and FDP resin materials have superior mechanical properties but inferior physical properties compared to CAD/CAM milled and other conventionally fabricated ones. Three-dimensionally printed provisional crowns and FDP materials can be used as an alternative to conventional and CAD/CAM milled long-term provisional materials.

Background and Objectives: The present systematic review and meta-analysis undertake a comparison of studies that examine the accuracy of robot-assisted dental implant placement in relation to static computer-assisted implant surgery (SCAIS), dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (DCAIS), and freehand procedures. This study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the precision of robot-assisted dental implant placement and its comparative efficacy in relation to other placement techniques. Methods: The guidelines recommended by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) were used to organize and compose this review. Four electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane) were systematically searched for pertinent articles. Articles were selected following the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of the selected articles were performed. Results: The initial electronic search resulted in 1087 hits. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, five articles were selected for qualitative analysis, out of which three were considered for quantitative analysis. Three parameters were considered for accuracy evaluation (angular, coronal, and apical deviation). The mean angular deviation was −1.22 degrees (95% CI, −1.06–−1.39), the mean coronal deviation was −0.15 mm (95% CI, −0.24–−0.07), and the mean apical deviation was −0.19 mm (95% CI, −0.27–−0.10). Conclusions: The robotic implant system was found to have significantly lower angular deviations and insignificantly lower coronal and apical deviations compared to DCAIS. Within the limitations of this review, it can be concluded that robot-assisted implant placement in resin models permits higher accuracy compared to DCAIS and SCAIS systems. However, due to the limited number of comparative studies with high heterogeneity, the findings of this review should be interpreted with caution. Further research is necessary to confirm the clinical application of robotics in implant surgery.

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the marginal fit and internal adaptation of provisional crowns and fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) fabricated using 3D-printing resins and compared them with those fabricated by CAD/CAM (computer-aided designing/computer-aided manufacturing) milling and conventional resins. The null hypotheses tested were that there would be no differences in the marginal fit and internal adaptation of 3D-printed provisional crowns and FDP resins when compared to CAD/CAM-milled and conventional provisional resins. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to construct this systematic review. The focused PICO/PECO (Population, Intervention/Exposure, Comparison, Outcome) question was “Do provisional crowns and FDPs (P) fabricated by 3D-printing (I) have similar marginal adaptation and internal fit (O) when compared to those fabricated by CAD/CAM milling and conventional techniques (C)?”. The protocol used for this systematic review was pre-registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). Electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE/PubMed and Web of Science (Core Collection)) were systematically searched for indexed English literature published up to June 2022. In the initial electronic search of the selected databases, 519 articles were identified. Duplicates were removed, and screening was performed to select the articles that met the preset inclusion criteria. Sixteen studies were selected for qualitative analysis, but only ten of them provided comparative data and were selected for quantitative analysis. The modified CONSORT scale was used for qualitative analysis, and most of the included studies were rated to be of moderate quality. Based on the findings, it could be concluded that provisional crowns and FDPs fabricated from 3D-printing resins have a superior marginal fit and internal adaptation when compared to CAD/CAM-milled and conventional provisional resins; thus, they can be used as a dependable alternative to other resins.

Objectives: Aramany's classification of postsurgical maxillectomy defects was introduced for partially edentulous situations, and has been widely used for education and effective communication among practitioners. Numerous classifications of maxillofacial defects, based on surgical procedure, resultant defects, or prosthodontist's perspective after rehabilitation, exist in the literature. However, no single classification has incorporated all these factors. The purpose of this review was to highlight the classification systems and describe a pragmatic classification series for edentulous maxillary arch defects (maxillectomy) by applying the Aramany classification criteria, to enhance treatment outcomes and communication among practitioners.Material and Methods: An electronic search of the literature published in English was conducted using the PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar database. Keywords used were “maxillectomy classification” AND “surgical resection,” “maxillectomy classification” AND “complete edentulous.” In addition, a manual search was also performed followed the same criteria in the following journals: Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry and Journal of Prosthodontics.Results: Several classification systems for partial dentition were found in terms of size, location, dentition, and extension of the defect (isolated or communication defects). The findings revealed a variety of maxillectomy defect classifications for partially dentate, considering surgical factors and rehabilitation. However, no study or classification system exist for the edentulous arch defects.Conclusions: Different classification systems for maxillectomy defects exist in the literature, only for partially dentate patients. To the authors best knowledge, no classification system for completely edentulous maxillary arch defects have been proposed till date. A simple classification system with clear characteristics for edentulous maxillectomy dental arch defects has been proposed. This classification was modeled after Aramany classification for easier memorization and application.

Introduction: Controlling the cross-contamination between the dental clinic and laboratory is of utmost importance to maintain the health of dental healthcare personnel (DHCP) and patients. The aim of this paper was to review the current literature with regard to the use of chlorhexidine as a prosthetic disinfectant in prosthodontic practice. Materials and methods: A scoping review of the literature was performed in Medline/PubMed, Ovid Embase, and the Cochrane Library. A search for all literature published from 1980 to 2021 was based on the following keywords: [‘Chlorhexidine/gluconate’ OR ‘chlorhexidine', OR 'gluconate', OR 'denture disinfectants', OR 'antimicrobial', OR 'disinfectant', OR ‘impression disinfectants, OR prosthesis’ OR ‘biofilm, microbiology’] OR [teeth]. We reviewed the disinfectant in terms of its mechanism of action, antimicrobial effectiveness, disinfection techniques, clinical applications, corrosiveness/damage to the structure of prostheses, and reasonable shelf life. Results: Chlorhexidine was tested under different concentrations ranging from 0.2 to 5%. It provided a significant reduction in biofilm viability but had a minimum effect on Candida albicans with a variable effect result that showed no significant differences in the dimensional changes by immersion of alginate dental impressions for no more than 10 minutes and no clinically significant dimensional differences on aluwax, polyether, condensation siloxane, and polyvinyl siloxane were noticed. Nonetheless, chlorhexidine altered the surface of the silicone and acrylic resins and affected the long-term hardness of the relining material. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this review, the use of chlorhexidine disinfectant demonstrates a good measure in the reduction of contamination and cross-infection and has a minimal effect on the dimensional stability of most impression materials. Further studies with in-vitro testing are required to confirm these findings.

The current literature lacks substantial evidence for the effect of denture base processing techniques and posterior denture tooth forms on denture tooth shifts due to denture base resin polymerization. The aim of this study was to evaluate the combined effect of PMMA-based denture processing techniques (compression packing and injection molding) and posterior tooth forms (semi-anatomic and non-anatomic) on the linear dimensional shift of denture teeth following denture processing in both horizontal and vertical dimensions. Two different complete denture fabrication techniques were used to prepare forty ideal maxillary complete dentures using two different types of posterior tooth forms. The used fabrication techniques were conventional heat polymerized compression packing and injection molding. The posterior tooth forms used in the current study were non-anatomic tooth (0 degrees) and semi-anatomic tooth forms (approximately 20 degrees). Initial linear measurements (vertical and horizontal) were taken from pre-specified points for the central incisor and first molar. Specimens were randomly divided into four groups (n = 10), and denture processing was performed using the two techniques. Final linear measurements were recorded. The linear change in dimension for all six parameters was calculated by deducting the after values from the before values. Since the discrepancies were both positive and negative in magnitude, the absolute value of the difference was taken for further analysis. This value represents the dimensional change. T-tests were used to compare the mean dimensional changes. Furthermore, the mean dimensional changes for all the six parameters were compared using a two-way analysis of variance. The alpha error was set at 5%, and a p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The injection molding technique showed significantly fewer tooth movements in both the vertical and horizontal measurements as compared to the conventional compression packing technique. The non-anatomic tooth showed significantly fewer changes in tooth movement as compared to semi-anatomic teeth in both the compression and injection techniques. This study can guide the selection of a proper processing technique for a particular posterior tooth form, thus minimizing occlusal discrepancies and reducing occlusal corrections during laboratory and clinical remount procedures.