Publicação
Photogrammetry technology in full arch implant-supported rehabilitations: a systematic review
| Resumo: | Objective: Perform a Systematic review to compare the accuracy of three methods of impressions on full arch implant-supported rehabilitations: photogrammetry (PG) against conventional (CNV) and intraoral digital scanning (IOS) techniques. Material and Methods: Electronic and manual searches were undertaken in four major databases (ScienceDirect, PubMed, Cochrane, and LILACS), until 8th August 2022. A manual search was made to enlarge the number of articles, complemented by a grey literature search (Google Scholar), and study quality assessed through established methods. Results: Twenty-one articles were retrieved from the search, 10 in vitro and 11 in vivo, based on the selection criteria and subjected to critical appraisal. With only 1 RCT included, a meta-analysis was not performed. Regarding 3D deviation, significant differences in precision, trueness, and overall accuracy in favor of PG were reported by one RCT and in vitro studies. Position and number of implants, and inter-implant angulations did not affect the accuracy of PG, both in clinical and in vitro settings. As reported by one RCT pilot, marginal bone loss was not significantly different across all methods, and PG was reportedly more time-effective, compared to CNV. Conclusions: Most studies reported that PG showed significantly better accuracy in full arch implant impressions, compared to IOS and CNV, and within the clinical acceptance threshold. More clinical studies are needed to develop the technology and validate these claims, preferably with much larger samples, and more standardized protocols. Soft tissue scanning integration in PG would drastically reduce working time and number of procedure steps. Clinical significance: Photogrammetry technology seems to reproduce and transfer implant positions with high accuracy levels, thus improving the overall quality of full arch implant-supported rehabilitations, within a fully digital workflow, when complemented with an intraoral scanner to register soft tissue information. |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | Barreto, Daniel Filipe da Conceição Moniz |
| Assunto: | Teses de mestrado - 2022 Saúde Oral |
| Ano: | 2022 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | dissertação de mestrado |
| Tipo de acesso: | acesso aberto |
| Instituição associada: | Universidade de Lisboa |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| Origem: | Repositório da Universidade de Lisboa |
| Resumo: | Objective: Perform a Systematic review to compare the accuracy of three methods of impressions on full arch implant-supported rehabilitations: photogrammetry (PG) against conventional (CNV) and intraoral digital scanning (IOS) techniques. Material and Methods: Electronic and manual searches were undertaken in four major databases (ScienceDirect, PubMed, Cochrane, and LILACS), until 8th August 2022. A manual search was made to enlarge the number of articles, complemented by a grey literature search (Google Scholar), and study quality assessed through established methods. Results: Twenty-one articles were retrieved from the search, 10 in vitro and 11 in vivo, based on the selection criteria and subjected to critical appraisal. With only 1 RCT included, a meta-analysis was not performed. Regarding 3D deviation, significant differences in precision, trueness, and overall accuracy in favor of PG were reported by one RCT and in vitro studies. Position and number of implants, and inter-implant angulations did not affect the accuracy of PG, both in clinical and in vitro settings. As reported by one RCT pilot, marginal bone loss was not significantly different across all methods, and PG was reportedly more time-effective, compared to CNV. Conclusions: Most studies reported that PG showed significantly better accuracy in full arch implant impressions, compared to IOS and CNV, and within the clinical acceptance threshold. More clinical studies are needed to develop the technology and validate these claims, preferably with much larger samples, and more standardized protocols. Soft tissue scanning integration in PG would drastically reduce working time and number of procedure steps. Clinical significance: Photogrammetry technology seems to reproduce and transfer implant positions with high accuracy levels, thus improving the overall quality of full arch implant-supported rehabilitations, within a fully digital workflow, when complemented with an intraoral scanner to register soft tissue information. |
|---|