Background/Objectives: Digital prosthodontics increasingly utilize both additive (3D printing) and subtractive Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM), yet comprehensive comparisons remain limited. This scoping review evaluates their relative performance across prosthodontic applications. Methods: Systematic searches (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, 2015–2025) identified 28 studies (27 in vitro, 1 retrospective). Data were extracted on accuracy, efficiency, materials, and outcomes. Results: CAD/CAM milling demonstrated superior accuracy for fixed prostheses, with marginal gaps for milled zirconia (123.89 ± 56.89 µm), comparable to optimized 3D-printed interim crowns (123.87 ± 67.42 µm, p = 0.760). For removable prostheses, milled denture bases achieved a trueness of 65 ± 6 µm, while SLA-printed dentures post-processed at 40 °C for 30 min showed the lowest root mean square error (RMSE) (30 min/40 °C group). Three-dimensional printing excelled in material efficiency ( 30–40%) and complex geometries, such as hollow-pontic fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) (2.0 mm wall thickness reduced gaps by 33%). Build orientation (45° for crowns, 30–45° for veneers) and post-processing protocols significantly influenced accuracy. Milled resins exhibited superior color stability (ΔE00: 1.2 ± 0.3 vs. 3D-printed: 4.5 ± 1.1, p < 0.05), while 3D-printed Co-Cr frameworks (SLM) showed marginal fits of 8.4 ± 3.2 µm, surpassing milling (130.3 ± 13.8 µm). Digital workflows reduced chairside time by 29% (154.31 ± 13.19 min vs. 218.00 ± 20.75 min). All methods met clinical thresholds (<120 µm gaps). Conclusions: Milling remains preferred for high-precision fixed prostheses, while 3D printing offers advantages in material efficiency, complex designs, and removable applications. Critical gaps include long-term clinical data and standardized protocols. Future research should prioritize hybrid workflows, advanced materials, and AI-driven optimization to bridge technical and clinical gaps.

We are committed to writing this narrative review given that carbon-based nanomaterials are revolutionizing dental medicine. Since the groundbreaking discovery of carbon nanotubes in 1991, their dental applications have skyrocketed. The numbers speak for themselves: in 2024, the global carbon nanotubes market hit USD 1.3 billion and is set to double to USD 2.6 billion by 2029. Over the past few decades, various forms of carbon nanomaterials have been integrated into dental practices, elevating the quality and effectiveness of dental treatments. They represent a transformative advancement in dentistry, offering numerous benefits such as augmented mechanical properties, antimicrobial activity, and potential for regenerative applications. Both carbon nanotubes (CNTs) and carbon dots (CDs) are derived from carbon and integral to nanotechnology, showcasing the versatility of carbon nanostructures and delivering cutting-edge solutions across diverse domains, such as electronics, materials science, and biomedicine. CNTs are ambitiously examined for their capability to reinforce dental materials, develop biosensors for detecting oral diseases, and even deliver therapeutic agents directly to affected tissues. This review synthesizes their current applications, underscores their interdisciplinary value in bridging nanotechnology and dentistry, identifies key barriers to clinical adoption, and discusses hybrid strategies warranting further research to advance implementation.

The growing challenge of biofilm-associated infections in dentistry necessitates advanced solutions. This review highlights the potential of smart bioactive and antibacterial materials—bioactive glass ceramics (BGCs), silver nanoparticle (AgNP)-doped polymers, and pH-responsive chitosan coatings—in transforming restorative dentistry. BGCs reduce biofilms by >90% while promoting bone integration. AgNP-polymers effectively combat S. mutans and C. albicans but require controlled dosing (<0.3 wt% in PMMA) to avoid cytotoxicity. Chitosan coatings enable pH-triggered drug release, disrupting acidic biofilms. Emerging innovations like quaternary ammonium compounds, graphene oxide hybrids, and 4D-printed hydrogels offer on-demand antimicrobial and regenerative functions. However, clinical translation depends on addressing cytotoxicity, standardizing antibiofilm testing (≥3-log CFU/mL reduction), and ensuring long-term efficacy. These smart materials pave the way for self-defending restorations, merging infection control with tissue regeneration. Future advancements may integrate AI-driven design for multifunctional, immunomodulatory dental solutions.

Zirconia’s superior mechanical properties and biocompatibility have made it a cornerstone of modern prosthodontics, yet achieving durable biomimetic bonding to tooth structure remains a challenge. This scoping review synthesizes evidence on bonding strategies for zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses (FDPs), evaluating surface treatments, cementation protocols, and long-term performance. Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, 18 studies from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase were thoroughly analyzed. Key findings indicate that tribochemical silica coating (e.g., Rocatec™) combined with 10-methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (MDP)-based primers (e.g., Panavia V5) is associated with the highest bond strengths (>40 MPa) and exceptional clinical survival rates (e.g., >95% at 15 years for resin-bonded FDPs). These combined mechanical–chemical strategies can be viewed as an attempt to create a biomimetic, hybrid interface akin to the natural enamel–dentin junction. Additively manufactured zirconia exhibits inferior bonding compared to milled counterparts, while ethyl cellulose coatings applied to the bonding surface effectively prevent contamination from saliva and moisture during intraoral try-in procedures. However, heterogeneous testing protocols and limited long-term clinical data highlight the need for standardized aging models and randomized trials. This review consolidates current evidence, offering clinically actionable recommendations through a biomimetic lens while identifying critical gaps for future research.

Background: Augmented reality (AR) is revolutionizing implant and tooth-supported prosthodontics (ITSP) through enhanced precision, workflow efficiency, and educational outcomes. This scoping review systematically evaluates AR’s clinical applications, educational impacts, and implementation challenges. Methods: Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, comprehensive searches were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase (2015–2025) for peer-reviewed studies on AR in ITSP. Eighteen studies met inclusion criteria after dual independent screening. Data extraction focused on clinical outcomes, educational benefits, and technological limitations. Results: AR applications demonstrated: ITSP Practice: Submillimeter implant placement accuracy (0.42–0.69 mm entry deviation; p < 0.001 vs. freehand), 30% faster intraoral scanning (44 s vs. 63 s), and 37% reduction in preparation errors (p < 0.05); ITSP Education: 22–30% faster skill acquisition (p < 0.05) and 99% reduction in assessment time (10.5 s vs. 2 h/case). Key Gaps: Limited to two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), hardware costs ($3500–$10,000), and lack of standardized validation protocols. Conclusions: While AR significantly enhances ITSP precision and training efficiency, widespread adoption requires longitudinal clinical validation, cost-effectiveness analyses, and interoperable digital workflows.

Background: The separation between oral and systemic health is increasingly challenged. Globally prevalent inflammatory diseases such as gastritis, often caused by Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori), and oral pathologies like periodontitis may be interconnected through microbial and inflammatory pathways. Objective: This review synthesizes evidence on the dental-gastric link, examining mechanistic pathways and clinical implications. Methods: A structured literature search identified key studies from 2000 to 2025, prioritizing systematic reviews and high-quality human research. Findings: Three key mechanistic pathways link oral dysbiosis with gastric pathology: (1) the direct translocation of oral pathogens to the stomach, including H. pylori and the broader dysbiotic oral microbiome; (2) the systemic inflammatory spillover from the periodontium, which primes the host immune system and exacerbates gastric inflammation; and (3) ancillary mechanisms such as the disruption of beneficial nitrate-nitrite-nitric oxide metabolism. Epidemiological studies show strong associations, and initial interventional trials indicate periodontal therapy may improve H. pylori eradication rates and reduce recurrence. However, the evidence is tempered by methodological limitations, including profound confounding by shared risk factors (e.g., smoking, socioeconomic status), the challenge of reverse causality, and inconsistent results from interventional studies. Conclusion: While confounding factors require consideration, oral health is a promising modifiable risk factor for gastritis. Interdisciplinary collaboration between dentistry and gastroenterology is essential to advance research and integrate oral care into gastrointestinal disease management.