This in vitro study aimed to compare the accuracy of implant placement in model surgeries carried out by implementation of three different methods. An in vitro study was conducted on 3D printed study models randomly assigned to three study groups. In Group 1, model surgeries were assisted by augmented reality (AR)based dynamic navigation (Innooral System, Innoimplant Ltd, Budapest, Hungary). In Group 2, implants were placed with a free-hand method, and in Group 3, static Computer Assisted Implant Surgery (CAIS) was used (coDiagnostiX software, version 10.4 Dental Wings, Montreal, CA, USA). A total of 48 dental implants (Callus Pro, Callus Implant Solutions GmbH, Hamburg, Germany) were placed (16 implants in four models per study group). The primary outcome variables were angular deviation, coronal, and apical global deviation. These were calculated for all implants based on preoperative registration of the surgical plan and postoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) reconstruction. The accuracy of implant placement using AR-based dynamic navigation showed no significant difference compared to static CAIS (angular deviation, 4.09 ± 2.79° and 3.21 ± 1.52°; coronal deviation, 1.27 ± 0.40 mm and 1.31 ± 0.42 mm; and apical global deviation 1.34 ± 0.41 mm and 1.38 ± 0.41 mm). Global deviation results were significantly lower with AR-based dynamic navigation than with the free-hand approach (coronal and apical global deviation of 1.93 ± 0.79 mm and 2.28 ± 0.74 mm, respectively). Implant positioning accuracy of AR-based dynamic navigation was comparable to that of static CAIS and superior to that obtained by the free-hand approach. Implementing Augmented Reality based dynamic Computer Assisted Implant Surgery (CAIS) in model surgeries may allow to obtain an implant positioning accuracy comparable to that provided by static CAIS, and superior to that obtained through the free-hand approach. Further clinical studies are necessary to determine the feasibility of AR-based dynamic navigation.

Objectives: To assess the histomorphometric outcomes obtained in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with different biomaterials used for maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA).Materials and Methods: A search of the existing medical literature until October 1, 2019, was performed. Inclusion criteria were (a) RCTs assessing a two‐stage MSA from the lateral approach using autologous bone or biomaterials for grafting and (b) reported histomorphometric outcomes based on crestal bone core biopsy samples. The Bayesian method was used to perform pairwise meta‐analyses and network meta‐analysis (NMA). The primary outcome, the new bone percentage (NB %), was calculated as mean differences with 95% credible intervals. The interventions were ranked by their posterior probability by calculating the surface under the cumulative ranking curve values.Results: Thirty‐four RCTs (842 MSAs) were included in the analysis with a normal healing period (5–8 months). All comparisons were presented in a league table. On the basis of the ranking probability, the most effective bone grafting material for NB% was bovine xenograft + bone marrow concentrate (BMC) (81%), followed by bovine xenograft + platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) (77%), bioactive glass ceramic + autologous bone 1:1 (70%), nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite in silica gel (70%), and bioactive glass ceramic (70%). Autologous bone graft alone took the twelfth position with 57%.Conclusion: Within the limitations of the present NMA, the analysis did not confirm autologous bone alone as the gold standard for MSA and showed superiority of composite grafts such as bovine xenograft + BMC after 5–8 months of healing.

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for approximal carious lesions on bitewing radiographs. This study included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (non-RCTs) reporting on the diagnostic accuracy of AI for approximal carious lesions on bitewing radiographs. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. A systematic search was conducted on November 4, 2023, in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases and an updated search was performed on August 28, 2024. The primary outcomes assessed were sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy. Sensitivity and specificity were pooled using a bivariate model. Of the 2,442 studies identified, 21 met the inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of AI were 0.94 (confidence interval (CI): ± 0.78-0.99) and 0.91 (CI: ± 0.84-0.95), respectively. The positive predictive value (PPV) ranged from 0.15 to 0.87, indicating a moderate capacity for identifying true positives among decayed teeth. The negative predictive value (NPV) ranged from 0.79 to 1.00, demonstrating a high ability to exclude healthy teeth. The diagnostic odds ratio was high, indicating strong overall diagnostic performance. AI models demonstrate clinically acceptable diagnostic accuracy for approximal caries on bitewing radiographs. Although AI can be valuable for preliminary screening, positive findings should be verified by dental experts to prevent unnecessary treatments and ensure timely diagnosis. AI models are highly reliable in excluding healthy approximal surfaces. AI can assist dentists in detecting approximal caries on bitewing radiographs. However, expert supervision is required to prevent iatrogenic damage and ensure timely diagnosis.

This meta-analysis aimed to determine the accuracy of currently available computer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS) modalities under in vitro conditions and investigate whether these novel techniques can achieve clinically acceptable accuracy. In vitro studies comparing the postoperative implant position with the preoperative plan were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool For In Vitro Studies (QUIN Tool) and a sensitivity analysis was conducted using funnel plots. A systematic search was performed on April 18, 2023, using the following three databases: MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. No filters or restrictions were applied during the search. A total of 5,894 studies were included following study selection. Robotic- and static CAIS (sCAIS) had the most accurate and clinically acceptable outcomes. sCAIS was further divided according to the guidance level. Among the sCAIS groups, fully guided implant placement had the greatest accuracy. Augmented reality-based CAIS (AR-based CAIS) had clinically acceptable results for all the outcomes except for apical global deviation. Dynamic CAIS (dCAIS) demonstrated clinically safe results, except for horizontal apical deviation. Freehand implant placement was associated with the greatest number of errors. Fully guided sCAIS demonstrated the most predictable outcomes, whereas freehand sCAIS demonstrated the lowest accuracy. AR-based and robotic CAIS may be promising alternatives. To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of robotic CAIS and investigate the accuracy of various CAIS modalities.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the later oral consequences of chemotherapy on the oral health of children with emphasis on the cariological status and the major and minor salivary gland function. Method: Thirty-eight 12-year-old children (mean age 12.3 ± 0.58 years) who underwent chemotherapy were evaluated after 5 years of treatment. Forty age- and sex-matched healthy children with similar socioeconomic backgrounds served as controls. Subjects’ cariological status was explained by the number of decayed, filled, missing permanent teeth (DMF-T), and unstimulated and stimulated whole saliva flow rates were measured by the spitting method. Palatal saliva flow rate using a Periotron meter (Oraflow Inc., Plainview, NY) and salivary buffer capacity using CRT buffer (Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Lichtenstein) were also investigated. Results: Children who underwent chemotherapy had significantly more decayed teeth than healthy controls (3.97 ± 3.58 vs 0.84 ± 1.75, respectively, p < 0.001). Recipients of chemotherapy had significantly lower stimulated whole saliva flow rate (0.84 ± 0.35 vs 1.13 ± 0.46 ml/min, p < 0.05) compared to the controls. Palatal saliva flow rate was at the same time significantly higher in the test group compared to the controls (1.64 ± 0.87 vs 0.46 ± 0.32 ml/min/cm², respectively, p < 0.001). High levels of buffer capacity of the saliva could be detected in a significantly higher prevalence in the patient group compared to the controls (high: 81.6% vs 40%). Conclusions: According to these results, chemotherapy in children might result in a decreased stimulated whole saliva flow rate, hyposalivation, and, consequently, increased caries risk. Although these processes might be compensated to a limited extend by the increased minor saliva flow rate, resulting in a higher buffer capacity, nutrition and oral hygiene control of children obtaining cancer therapy is essential in the preservation of the oral tissues.

The study answers the PECO question: "In adults with dental implants (P), do subjects suffering from type-2 diabetes or prediabetes (E) have worse peri-implant conditions (O) than subjects without type-2 diabetes and prediabetes (C)?". Prediabetes (5.7-6.4 % HbA1c), and the different qualities of glycemic control in type-2 diabetes; well-controlled (>8 % HbA1c), and poorly controlled (>8 % HbA1c) individuals; were classified according to the recommendations of the American Diabetes Association. Predefined search keys were used with search terms including: Dental implant, diabetes mellitus, glycemic control and HbA1c. An electronic search in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane libraries were conducted without any filters or language restrictions. Additionally, manual search of the reference lists were carried out to identify all relevant articles. Eligibility criteria were cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies that answerd our PECO question with at least 1 year of follow-up. From a total of 2660 records, 35 articles (1761 individuals) were included in the analysis. Meta-analytic difference in means for crestal bone loss was 1.2 mm [95 % CI=0.4; 2.1] in patients with prediabetes, 1.8 mm [CI=1.0; 2.7] in poorly controlled patients, whereas 0.4 mm [CI=-0.3; 1.1] in well-controlled individuals. Meta-regression showed that 1 % increase in HbA1c increased crestal bone loss by 0.24 mm. Within the limitations of the study, patients with poorly controlled type-2 diabetes or prediabetes may have worse peri-implant conditions compared to patients without diabetes and well-controlled type-2 diabetes. Well-controlled type-2 diabetes is not a risk indicator for peri-implant diseases. Clinicians should measure blood HbA1c levels when planning implant-supported restorations, thus patients with undiagnosed or poorly controlled type-2 diabetes can be identified, that allows for glycemic level adjustment prior to dental implant surgery, ensuring peri-implant health. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: (CRD42022375263).