The peripheral hearing alterations and central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) associated with age-related hearing loss (ARHL), may impact cognitive disorders in older age. In older age, ARHL is also a significant marker for frailty, another age-related multidimensional clinical condition with a nonspecific state of vulnerability, reduced multisystem physiological reserve, and decreased resistance to different stressors (i.e. sensorial impairments, psychosocial stress, diseases, injuries). The multidimensional nature of frailty required an approach based on different pathogeneses because this clinical condition may include sensorial, physical, social, nutritional, cognitive, and psychological phenotypes. In the present narrative review, the cumulative epidemiological evidence coming from several longitudinal population-based studies, suggested convincing links between peripheral ARHL and incident cognitive decline and dementia. Moreover, a few longitudinal case-control and population-based studies also suggested that age-related CAPD in ARHL, may be central in determining an increased risk of incident cognitive decline, dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Cumulative meta-analytic evidence confirmed cross-sectional and longitudinal association of both peripheral ARHL and age-related CAPD with different domains of cognitive functions, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia, while the association with dementia subtypes such as AD and vascular dementia remained unclear. However, ARHL may represent a modifiable condition and a possible target for secondary prevention of cognitive impairment in older age, social isolation, late-life depression, and frailty. Further research is required to determine whether broader hearing rehabilitative interventions including coordinated counseling and environmental accommodations could delay or halt cognitive and global decline in the oldest old with both ARHL and dementia.

Intraoral scanners may offer an alternative to traditional impressions. That intraoral scanners produce precise scans is essential. Popular methods used to evaluate precision tend to rely on mean distance deviation between repeated scans. Mean value measurements may underestimate errors resulting in misleading conclusions and clinical decisions. This study investigated the precision of six intraoral scanners using the traditional method of measuring mean error, and a proposed method considering only the most extreme and clinically relevant aspects of a scan. An edentulous model was scanned five times using six intraoral scanners. The repeated scans were aligned, uniformly trimmed and mean surface deviation measured across all 20 scan combinations within each scanner group. All scan combinations were then measured by arranging scan vertices from greatest to smallest unsigned distance from its compared scan and measuring the median value within the 1% of most greatly deviating points. Traditional mean deviation results and upper-bound deviations were compared. The upper-bound deviation within a scan reported errors up to two times greater than those found when measuring global mean distances. Results revealed clinically relevant errors of more than 0.3mm in scans produced by the Planmeca and Dentalwings scanners, findings not seen when measuring mean distance error of the complete scan. Upper-bound deviation of a cropped scan may provide a clinically useful metric for scanner precision. The Aadva, 3Shape, CEREC and TDS produced scans potentially appropriate for clinical use while Planmeca and Dentalwings produced deviations greater than 0.3mm when measuring the upper-bound deviation.

Purpose: To describe a technique intended to transfer of the intermaxillary and occlusal relationships in a fully digital environment from a complete denture to an implant-supported 3D-printed hybrid prosthesis (an acrylic resin complete fixed dental prosthesis supported by implants). Methods: In edentulous cases, the physiological mandibular position should be determined before the immediate loading procedures. In some cases, the use of interim removable prostheses for a few weeks could be useful to test the new occlusion in centric relation and to verify the prosthetic project. When the correct intermaxillary relationships are achieved, it is difficult to transfer them from the provisional to the final prostheses, as impressions or scans of edentulous arches do not have reference points for intermaxillary records. This paper presents a complex case and the technique used to transfer information from a complete denture to an implant-supported prosthesis with a digital workflow. A prosthetic stent has been used to scan the edentulous mandibular arch and to record the intermaxillary relation. Results: The delivery of the hybrid implant-supported prostheses was carried out with no problems and minimal occlusal adjustments. The patient was extremely satisfied with the treatment and the situation remained stable at the 1-year follow up. Conclusions: The approach described in the present article predictably maintains prosthetic information and allows the delivery of a final implant-supported restoration with the same occlusal relationship as the one tested with the provisional diagnostic dentures.

Background: This study aimed to assess the accuracy of digital workflow for guided insertion of miniscrews in the anterior palate using restorative implant dentistry software and licensed software for orthodontic applications. Methods: Twenty subjects (8 males, 12 females, mean age = 16.7 ± 2.1 years) were prospectively selected to receive guided insertion of bicortical palatal miniscrews. Virtual planning was performed using restorative implant dentistry software (Blue Sky Plan*, version 4.7) (group 1 = 10 subjects) and licensed orthodontic software (Dolphin Imaging Software, version 11.0) (group 2 = 10 subjects). A specific 3D Imaging technology was applied to permit the registration of the planned and achieved position of the miniscrews based on the superimposition of maxillary models. The angular deviation (accuracy error) between the planned and the achieved positions of the miniscrews were recorded. Independent Student’s test was used with statistical significance set at p value < 0.05. Results: The mean accuracy error recorded in group 1 was 7.15° ± 1.09 (right side) and 6.19 ± 0.80 (left side) while the mean error in group 2 was 6.74° ± 1.23 (right side) and 5.79 ± 0.95 (left side). No significant differences were recorded between the two groups (p > 0.05); instead, miniscrews placed on the right side were almost one degree higher than the left side (p < 0.05) in both groups. Conclusions: The clinical accuracy error was similar when using generic and licensed orthodontic software for guided systems.