Peter Gehrke

Dr. Peter Gehrke

Dhom & Partner, Oral Surg & Implant Dent, Bismarckstr 27, D-67059 Ludwigshafen, Germany
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

21Years (2006-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
25 March 2013 in Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PGPeter Gehrke
Peter Gehrke
JAJochen Alius
Jochen Alius
CFCarsten Fischer
Carsten Fischer
KEKurt J. Erdelt
Kurt J. Erdelt
FBFlorian Beuer
Florian Beuer

1 May 2024 in International Journal of Implant Dentistry
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PGPeter Gehrke
Peter Gehrke
MRMahsa Rashidpour
Mahsa Rashidpour
RSRobert Alexander Sader
Robert Alexander Sader
PWPaul Weigl
Paul Weigl
Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review was to explore and identify the factors that influence the accuracy of intraoral scanning in implant dentistry, with a specific focus on scan bodies (ISBs). Methods: Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, this study conducted a thorough electronic search across MedLine, PubMed, and Scopus to identify relevant studies. Articles were screened based on titles, abstracts, and full texts for relevance. The Robins I tool assessed the risk of bias in various study types. Data extraction occurred based on predetermined parameters for studying specimens and assessing outcomes. Results: 16 studies met the specified criteria and were consequently included in the systematic review. Due to variations in variables and methods across the selected studies, statistical comparison of results was not feasible. Therefore, a descriptive review approach was chosen, acknowledging the substantial heterogeneity in the reviewed literature. Conclusions: The precision of virtual scan results is contingent upon diverse characteristics of ISBs and implants. These factors encompass their placement within the dental arch, structural design, shape, material composition, color, and the manufacturing system, all of which contribute to scan accuracy. Additionally, considerations such as the intraoral scanner (IOS) type, scanning technique, use of scan aids, inter-implant distance, scan span, and the number of implants warrant evaluation. In the context of capturing implant positions, intraoral scanning with ISBs demonstrates comparable accuracy to traditional impression methods, particularly in single and short-span scenarios. However, the existing data lacks sufficient information on in vivo applications to formulate clinical recommendations.

8 December 2008 in Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
PGPeter Gehrke
Peter Gehrke
MLMarkus Lobert
Markus Lobert
GDGünter Dhom
Günter Dhom

14 June 2019 in BMC Oral Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PGPeter Gehrke
Peter Gehrke
KBKonstantin Bleuel
Konstantin Bleuel
CFCarsten Fischer
Carsten Fischer
RSRobert Sader
Robert Sader
The flexibility in designing the submucosal part of CAD/CAM customized implant abutments and the individual positioning of its shoulder line has been suggested to reduce the risk of leaving undetected cement residues, thus preventing adverse effects on peri-implant tissues. A high correlation between excess cement left in the soft tissues and the occurrence of increased biofilm accumulation with sulcular bleeding and/ or suppuration has been reported. This in turn may cause peri-implant inflammation and peri-implant marginal bone loss. The aim of this study was to assess the frequency of cement remnants after the luting of zirconia crowns on CAD/CAM custom molar abutments with different margin levels and to evaluate the impact of the luting material. A total of 20 titanium molar CAD/CAM implant abutments (BEGO Medical GmbH) with internal taper connection/ internal hex anti-rotation protection, and a convex emergence profile with different margin positions (0, 1, 2 and 3 mm below the mucosa), were virtually designed (Implant Studio, 3Shape) and manufactured. A master cast was scanned, duplicated by a 3D printer and individual gingival masks were produced to simulate peri-implant soft tissues. 20 corresponding zirconia crowns were designed (Cerec 3D, Dentsply Sirona), produced and cemented to the abutments with two different luting materials; a zinc oxide non-eugenol cement (Temp Bond NE) or a methacrylate cement (Panavia V5). To ensure retrievability of the crown/abutment connection, occlusal openings providing access to the abutment screws were designed. Excess cement was thoroughly removed and the crown/abutment units were unscrewed to evaluate the occurrence of cement residues. All the quadrants of each specimen were evaluated for calculation of the ratio between the cement remnant area and the total specimen area using Adobe Photoshop. Spearman analysis was performed to detect correlations between different variables. A two-sided t-test, ANOVA, Mann–Whitney, and Kruskal–Wallis tests were applied to detect differences between the groups. Cement remnants were found in every depth of the crown abutment complex and in almost every area investigated. The amount of cement residues increased as the crown-abutment margin was located more submucosally. Lingual areas were more prone to cement remnants than other surface areas (p = 0.0291). Excess cement was not only found at the margins of the crown-abutment complex, but also underneath (basal) the abutment itself, where cleaning was impossible. No statistical difference in the effect of zinc oxide non-eugenol- and methacrylate cement on the frequency of excess material at the lateral abutment surfaces could be demonstrated in vitro. The proportion of basal abutment aspects covered with cement residues was, however, significantly smaller in Panavia V5 samples with an average of 4.9 ± 3.7% compared to Temp Bond samples with an average of 8.6 ± 5.5%. Given the results obtained in the present investigation the margin of CAD/CAM molar abutments should be located as coronally as possible to minimize the amount of cement remnants. If an epigingival or supragingival margin location is not feasible due to esthetic concerns, it cannot be recommended to place the margin of molar CAD/CAM abutments deeper than 1.5 mm in the proximal and oral regions.

1 January 2015 in The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PGPeter Gehrke
Peter Gehrke
ATAstrid Tabellion
Astrid Tabellion
CFCarsten Fischer
Carsten Fischer
Gehrke P, et al. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015 Apr;7(2):151-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2015.7.2.151

12 December 2019 in International Journal of Implant Dentistry
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
IKIngrid Kästel
Ingrid Kästel
GQGiles de Quincey
Giles de Quincey
JNJörg Neugebauer
Jörg Neugebauer
RSRobert Sader
Robert Sader
PGPeter Gehrke
Peter Gehrke
Background: There is disagreement about the optimal torque for tightening smartpegs for resonance frequency analysis (RFA). Subjective finger pressure during hand tightening could affect the reliability of the resulting values. The aim of the current study was therefore to assess whether or not the insertion torque of a smartpeg magnetic device influences the implant stability quotient (ISQ) value during RFA.Methods: Thirty self-tapping screw implants (XiVE S, Dentsply Sirona Implants, Bensheim, Germany) with a diameter of 3.8 mm and a length of 11 mm were inserted in three cow ribs with a bone quality of D1. The RFA value of each implant was measured (Ostell, FA W&H Dentalwerk, Bürmoos, Austria) in two orthogonal directions (mesial and buccal) after tightening the corresponding smartpeg type 45 with a mechanically defined value of 5 Ncm (Meg Torq device, Megagen, Daegu, South Korea) (test). Additionally, 4 different examiners measured the RFA after hand tightening the smartpegs, and the results were compared (control). Insertion torque values were determined by measuring the unscrew torque of hand seated smartpegs (Tohnichi Manufacturing Co. Ltd, Tokyo, Japan).Results: The ISQ values varied from 2 to 11 Ncm by hand tightening and from 2 to 6 Ncm by machine tightening. The comparison of hand and machine tightening of smartpegs displayed only minor differences in the mean ISQ values with low standard deviations (mesial 79.76 ± 2,11, buccal 77.98 ± 2,) and no statistical difference (mesialp= 0,343 and buccalp= 0,890).Conclusions: Manual tightening of smartpeg transducers allows for an objective and reliable determination of ISQ values during RFA.