Background: 3D printing is a rapidly developing technology in the healthcare industry and in dentistry. Its application clearly shows that this area of digital dentistry has potential for everyday usage across all fields, including prosthodontics, orthodontics, maxillofacial surgery, and oral implantology. However, despite gaining ground, there is a lack of information about how specialists (dentists and dental technicians) use additive technology. Our research group aimed to investigate the impact of social media on additive manufacturing technology among dental specialists and their everyday usage of 3D printing. Methods: This paper investigated specialists’ everyday usage of 3D printers via an online survey (Google Forms). The survey questions aimed to discover the number of 3D printers used, the accessibility of the devices, the annual cost, and the design programs. Since specialists tend to build online communities on social media, we circulated our study questionnaire using our profiles on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram platforms during our research. Results: A total of 120 responses were received from 20 countries, with the most significant numbers being from Hungary 23.7% (n = 27), the United States 18.4% (n = 21), and the United Kingdom 7.9% (n = 9). Most of the participants were dentists (n = 68) or dental technicians (n = 29), but some CAD/CAM specialists (n = 23) also completed our survey. The participants had an average of 3.8 years (±0.7) of experience in the 3D printing field, and owned a total of 405 printing devices (3.6 on average/person). Conclusions: The impact of social media on this research field is growing increasingly. Hence, we support specialists in joining virtual communities on professional platforms. This article intended to provide a practical overview, feedback, and direction for dentists interested in 3D printing technology. From our survey, we can conclude that additive technology is broadening dental applications and the services that we can provide for our patients.

Intraoral scanners (IOS) are continuing to gain popularity in clinical dentistry, replacing the traditional impression-taking and related technology. Despite their increasing importance, there are few data on the utility and usage of IOS amongst dentists. This study investigates the user experience of IOS technology as well as the perceived quality of a variety of IOS used by dental clinicians worldwide. An online survey of 1072 dentists was conducted to elicit data on the number of individual IOS used, their accessibility, the maintenance fees, and the programmes used. The first part of the questionnaire included demographic data and related questions, whilst the second part focussed on the specific IOS used by the respondents and the satisfaction with their scanners. We surveyed 1072 respondents from 109 different countries. More than three-quarters of the survey cohort (78.8%) use IOS in their daily work, whilst 21.17% do not. The average number of scanners owned by the respondents was 1.5 (±0.9), and in total, the cohort used 36 different types of IOS. More than one-third (38.6%) of the respondents used computer-aided design (CAD) software as well. As for the frequency of IOS usage, 51.5% used the system on a daily basis, 28.2% did so 2 to 3 times a week, and 10.0% did so once a week. Overall, the top 3 IOS used by the cohort were Medit i700 followed by wireless Medit i700 and Dentsply Sirona Primescan. This study describes, for the first time, the IOS user experience in an international cohort. More than 75% of the respondents used IOS on a daily basis in their practice, whilst Medit and Dentsply Sirona brands were the most popular scanners amongst the group. It appears that digital impression-taking technology is universal, and digital workflow in dentistry will continue to grow.

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.

Introduction: This article describes the authors’ digital workflow-based method for fabricating intraoral occlusal splints, from planning to the evaluation phase. Materials and Methods: In our protocol, first, we had a registration phase. This included taking digital impressions, determining the centric relation (CR) position with the deprogrammer Luci Jig, and using the digital facebow for measuring the individual values. The laboratory phase was next, which included planning and manufacturing with a 3D printer. The last phase was delivery, when we checked the stability of the splint and adjusted the occlusal part. Result: The average cost is lower for a fully digital splint than for conventional methods. In terms of time, there was also a significant difference between the classic and digital routes. From a dental technical point of view, the execution was much more predictable. The printed material was very rigid and, therefore, fragile. Compared to the analog method, the retention was much weaker. Conclusion: The presented method permits time-efficient laboratory production, and may also be performed chairside in a dental office. The technology is perfectly applicable to everyday life. In addition to its many beneficial properties, its negative properties must also be highlighted.

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).

Computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) technology in dentistry has become noticeably more significant in recent years. The further development of CAD/CAM systems has led to a broader range of applications, more user-friendly operation, and improved accessibility. The present online survey aimed to investigate CAD/CAM technology utilisation amongst Austrian dentists as the first social media pilot study from Europe on this specific topic. For this purpose, an online survey consisting of 27 questions was created using Google Forms. The questions were divided into 3 sections: general inquiries, questions for CAD/CAM users, and questions for nonusers. The questionnaire was randomly distributed to Austrian dentists via email and social media. A total of 115 responses were submitted. The vast majority of respondents, 52.6% (n = 60), practised as general dentists. Furthermore, a significant proportion of participants specialised in oral surgery, 17.5% (n = 20), and orthodontics, 12.3% (n = 14). Approximately half of the respondents, 51.8% (n = 59), reported having a CAD/CAM device at their current workplace. Amongst the CAD/CAM users, 70.7% (n = 58) believed that CAD/CAM is important in increasing the number of patients visiting the dental practice. In total, 54.2% (n = 26) of nonusers indicated the high initial cost of purchasing a CAD/CAM device as the main reason for not utilising this technology. CAD/CAM technology appears to have infiltrated the workflow of Austrian dentists with predictions of growing implementation amongst dental practices in the future.