Advertisement

Comprehensive Integrated Digital Workflow to Guide Surgery and Prosthetics for Full-Arch Rehabilitation: A Narrative Review

  • Alessandro PozziEmail author
  • Lorenzo Arcuri
  • Peter Moy
Chapter
Part of the BDJ Clinician’s Guides book series (BDJCG)

Abstract

The ultimate patient expectations today for implant rehabilitation are no longer just to improve function by replacing of missing teeth, but also to have the prosthetic rehabilitation appear as natural as possible (Rosenfeld et al., Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 26:215–221, 2006). The prosthetically driven diagnosis and treatment are mandatory to achieve an optimal implant positioning and deliver the ideal prosthetic reconstruction (Rosenfeld et al., Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 26:347–353, 2006; Rosenfeld et al., Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 26:493–499, 2006).

Full-mouth and extensive implant-supported rehabilitations must be guided by the structural architecture of the face to obtain functional and aesthetic results. The facial analysis, with all interrelated anatomic components involved in the patient smile (lips, cheeks, gingival architecture and teeth), needs to be analysed in order to deliver a successful facial and smile rejuvenation (Calamia et al., Dental Clin NA 55:187–209, 2011; Davis, Dental Clin NA 51:299–318, 2007; Spear and Kokich, Dental Clin NA 51:487–505, 2007; Giannuzzi and Motlagh, Dental Clin NA 59:609–621, 2015; Coachman et al., J Prosthet Dent 117:577–584, 2017).

The purpose of this chapter is to present a systematic approach to guided surgery and prosthetic rehabilitation for the edentulous patient.

References

  1. 1.
    Rosenfeld AL, Mandelaris GA, Tardieu PB. Prosthetically directed implant placement using computer software to ensure precise placement and predictable prosthetic outcomes. Part 1: diagnostics, imaging, and collaborative accountability. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2006;26(3):215–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rosenfeld AL, Mandelaris GA, Tardieu PB. Prosthetically directed implant placement using computer software to ensure precise placement and predictable prosthetic outcomes. Part 2: rapid-prototype medical modeling and stereolithographic drilling guides requiring bone exposure. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2006;26(4):347–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rosenfeld AL, Mandelaris GA, Tardieu PB. Prosthetically directed implant placement using computer software to ensure precise placement and predictable prosthetic outcomes. Part 3: stereolithographic drilling guides that do not require bone exposure and the immediate delivery of teeth. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2006;26(5):493–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Calamia JR, Levine JB, Lipp M, Cisneros G, Wolff MS. Smile design and treatment planning with the help of a comprehensive esthetic evaluation form. Dental Clin NA. 2011;55(2):187–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davis NC. Smile Design. Dental Clinics of NA. 2007;51(2):299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Spear FM, Kokich VG. A multidisciplinary approach to esthetic dentistry. Dental Clin NA. 2007;51(2):487–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giannuzzi NJ, Motlagh SD. Full mouth rehabilitation determined by anterior tooth position. Dental Clin NA. 2015;59(3):609–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coachman C, Calamita MA, Coachman FG, Coachman RG, Sesma N. Facially generated and cephalometric guided 3D digital design for complete mouth implant rehabilitation: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117(5):577–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abdulmajeed A, Lim KG, Närhi TO, Cooper LF. Complete-arch implant-supported monolithic zirconiafixed dental prostheses: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 2016;115(6):672–677.e1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    van Steenberghe D, Naert I, Andersson M, Brajnovic I, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Suetens P. A custom template and definitive prosthesis allowing immediate implant loading in the maxilla: a clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002;17(5):663–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jacobs R, Adriansens A, Verstreken K, Suetens P, van Steenberghe D. Predictability of a three-dimensional planning system for oral implant surgery. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1999;28(2):105–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Klein M, Abrams M. Computer-guided surgery utilizing a computer-milled surgical template. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2001;13(2):165–9. –quiz170.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vrielinck L, Politis C, Schepers S, Pauwels M, Naert I. Image-based planning and clinical validation of zygoma and pterygoid implant placement in patients with severe bone atrophy using customized drill guides. Preliminary results from a prospective clinical follow-up study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003;32(1):7–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pozzi A, Polizzi G, Moy PK. Guided surgery with tooth-supported templates for single missing teeth: a critical review. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2016;9(2):135–53.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Arunyanak SP, Harris BT, Grant GT, Morton D, Lin W-S. Digital approach to planning computer-guided surgery and immediate provisionalization in a partially edentulous patient. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(1):8–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pozzi A, Tallarico M, Marchetti M, Scarfo B, Esposito M. Computer-guided versus free-hand placement of immediately loaded dental implants: 1-year post-loading results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014;7(3):229–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sennerby L, Andersson P, Pagliani L, Giani C, Moretti G, Molinari M, et al. Evaluation of a novel cone beam computed tomography scanner for bone density Examinations in Preoperative 3D reconstructions and correlation with primary implant stability. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(5):844–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    van Steenberghe D, Glauser R, Blombäck U, Andersson M, Schutyser F, Pettersson A, et al. A computed tomographic scan-derived customized surgical template and fixed prosthesis for flapless surgery and immediate loading of implants in fully edentulous maxillae: a prospective multicenter study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2005;7(Suppl 1):S111–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Verhamme LM, Meijer GJ, Boumans T, de Haan AFJ, Bergé SJ, Maal TJJ. A clinically relevant accuracy study of computer-planned implant placement in the edentulous maxilla using mucosa-supported surgical templates. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(2):343–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pettersson A, Komiyama A, Hultin M, Näsström K, Klinge B. Accuracy of virtually planned and template guided implant surgery on edentate patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(4):527–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ritter L, Reiz SD, Rothamel D, Dreiseidler T, Karapetian V, Scheer M, et al. Registration accuracy of three-dimensional surface and cone beam computed tomography data for virtual implant planning. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2012;23(4):447–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Geng W, Liu C, Su Y, Li J, Zhou Y. Accuracy of different types of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing surgical guides for dental implant placement. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8(6):8442–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ozan O, Turkyilmaz I, Ersoy AE, McGlumphy EA, Rosenstiel SF. Clinical accuracy of 3 different types of computed tomography-derived stereolithographic surgical guides in implant placement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67(2):394–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tahmaseb A, Wismeijer D, Coucke W, Derksen W. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29(Supplement):25–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Al-Rawi B, Hassan B, Vandenberge B, Jacobs R. Accuracy assessment of three-dimensional surface reconstructions of teeth from cone beam computed tomography scans. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37(5):352–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vandenberghe B, Jacobs R, Bosmans H. Modern dental imaging: a review of the current technology and clinical applications in dental practice. Eur Radiol. 2010;20(11):2637–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    D’haese J, Van De Velde T, Komiyama A, Hultin M, De Bruyn H. Accuracy and complications using computer-designed Stereolithographic surgical guides for oral rehabilitation by means of dental implants: a review of the literature. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010;14(3):321–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Farley NE, Kennedy K, McGlumphy EA. Split-mouth comparison of the accuracy of computer-generated and conventional surgical guides. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013;28(2):563–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Esposito M, Maghaireh H, Grusovin MG, Ziounas I, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: management of soft tissues for dental implants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;2:CD006697.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fortin T, Bosson JL, Isidori M, Blanchet E. Effect of flapless surgery on pain experienced in implant placement using an image-guided system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006;21(2):298–304.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Becker W, Goldstein M, Becker BE, Sennerby L, Kois D, Hujoel P. Minimally invasive flapless implant placement: follow-up results from a multicenter study. J Periodontol. 2009;80(2):347–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Landázuri-Del Barrio RA, Cosyn J, De Paula WN, De Bruyn H, Marcantonio E Jr. A prospective study on implants installed with flapless-guided surgery using the all-on-four concept in the mandible. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2011;24(4):428–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sclar AG. Guidelines for flapless surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65(7 Suppl 1):20–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Moraschini V, Velloso G, Luz D, Barboza EP. Implant survival rates, marginal bone level changes, and complications in full-mouth rehabilitation with flapless computer-guided surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;44(7):892–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cosyn J, Hooghe N, De Bruyn H. A systematic review on the frequency of advanced recession following single immediate implant treatment. J Clin Periodontol. 2012;39(6):582–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Khzam N, Arora H, Kim P, Fisher A, Mattheos N, Ivanovski S. A systematic review of soft tissue alterations and aesthetic outcomes following immediate implant placement and restoration of single implants in the anterior maxilla. J Periodontol. 2015;86(12):1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Araújo MG, Sukekava F, Wennstrom JL, Lindhe J. Ridge alterations following implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: an experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 2005;32(6):645–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Staffileno H. Significant differences and advantages between the full thickness and split thickness flaps. J Periodontol. 1974;45(6):421–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Arısan V, Bölükbaşı N, Öksüz L. Computer-assisted flapless implant placement reduces the incidence of surgery-related bacteremia. Clin Oral Invest. 2013;17(9):1985–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Campelo LD, Camara JRD. Flapless implant surgery: a 10-year clinical retrospective analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002;17(2):271–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pommer B. Techniques to preserve keratinized peri-implant mucosa in CT-guided oral implant surgery. Surg Tech Dev. 2012;2(1):27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Koutrach M, Nimmo A. Preservation of existing soft-tissue contours in the transition from a tooth to an implant restoration in the esthetic zone using a flapless approach: a clinical report. J Prosthodont. 2010;19(5):391–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pozzi A, Holst S, Fabbri G, Tallarico M. Clinical reliability of CAD/CAM cross-arch zirconia bridges on immediately loaded implants placed with computer-assisted/template-guided surgery: a retrospective study with a follow-up between 3 and 5 years. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(Suppl 1):e86–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Larsson C, von PV S, Nilner K. A prospective study of implant-supported full-arch yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal mandibular fixed dental prostheses: three-year results. Int J Prosthodont. 2010;23(4):364–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Larsson C, von PV S. Five-year follow-up of implant-supported Y-TZP and ZTA fixed dental prostheses. A randomized, prospective clinical trial comparing two different material systems. Int J Prosthodont. 2010;23(6):555–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Larsson C, Vult von Steyern P. Implant-supported full-arch zirconia-based mandibular fixed dental prostheses. Eight-year results from a clinical pilot study. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013;71:1118–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Le MPE, Larsson C. The clinical success of tooth- and implant- supported zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses. A systematic review. J Oral Rehabil. 2015;42:467–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Pozzi A, Tallarico M, Barlattani A. Monolithic lithium Disilicate full-contour crowns bonded on CAD/CAM zirconia complete-arch implant bridges with 3 to 5 years of follow-up. J Oral Implantol. 2015;41(4):450–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Serino G, Ström C. Peri-implantitis in partially edentulous patients: association with inadequate plaque control. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2009;20(2):169–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Quirynen M, De Soete M, van Steenberghe D. Infectious risks for oral implants: a review of the literature. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2002;13(1):1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Block MS, Kent JN. Factors associated with soft-and hard-tissue compromise of endosseous implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1990;48(11):1153–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Thomas A, Sridhar S, Aghyarian S, Watkins-curry P, Chan JY, Pozzi A, et al. Corrosion behavior of zirconia in acidulated phosphate fluoride. J Appl Oral Sci. 2016;24(1):52–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Hämmerle CHF, Cordaro L, Van Assche N, Benic GI, Bornstein M, Gamper F, et al. Digital technologies to support planning, treatment, and fabrication processes and outcome assessments in implant dentistry. Summary and consensus statements. The 4th EAO consensus conference 2015. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2015;26:97–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Joda T, Brägger U. Digital vs. conventional implant prosthetic workflows: a cost/time analysis. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2015;26(12):1430–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Joda T, Brägger U. Patient-centered outcomes comparing digital and conventional implant impression procedures: a randomized crossover trial. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2016;27(12):e185–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mandelaris GA, Vlk SD. Guided implant surgery with placement of a presurgical CAD/CAM patient-specific abutment and provisional in the esthetic zone. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2014;35(7):494–504.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Pozzi A, Moy PK. Minimally invasive transcrestal guided sinus lift (TGSL): a clinical prospective proof-of-concept cohort study up to 52 months. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014;16(4):582–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Pozzi A, Sannino G, Barlattani A. Minimally invasive treatment of the atrophic posterior maxilla: a proof-of-concept prospective study with a follow-up of between 36 and 54 months. J Prosthet Dent. 2012;108(5):286–97. http://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=23107236&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ganz SD. Three-DimensionalImaging and guided surgery for dental implants. Dent Clin N Am. 2015;59(2):265–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Gracis S, Thompson VP, Ferencz JL, Silva NRFA, Bonfante EA. A new classification system for all-ceramic and ceramic-like restorative materials. Int J Prosthodont. 2015;28(3):227–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kapos T, Evans C. CAD/CAM technology for implant abutments, crowns, and superstructures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29(Suppl):117–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Pozzi A, Tallarico M, Moy PK. Four-implant overdenture fully supported by a CAD/CAM titanium bar: a single-cohort prospective 1-year preliminary study. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(4):516–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Schnitman PA, Han RK. Completely digital two-visit immediately loaded implants: proof of concept. J Oral Implantol. 2015;41(4):429–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Brodala N. Flapless surgery and its effect on dental implant outcomes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(Suppl):118–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Sicilia A, Botticelli D, Working Group 3. Computer-guided implant therapy and soft- and hard-tissue aspects. The third EAO consensus conference 2012. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(Suppl 6):157–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    D’haese J, Ackhurst J, Wismeijer D, De Bruyn H, Tahmaseb A. Current state of the art of computer-guided implant surgery. Periodontol. 2017;73(1):121–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Solaberrieta E, Minguez R, Etxaniz O, Barrenetxea L. Improving the digital workflow: direct transfer from patient to virtual articulator. Int J Comput Dent. 2013;16(4):285–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Solaberrieta E, Otegi JR, Goicoechea N, Brizuela A, Pradies G. Comparison of a conventional and virtual occlusal record. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(1):92–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Lee SJ, Betensky RA, Gianneschi GE, Gallucci GO. Accuracy of digital versus conventional implant impressions. Clin Oral Impl Res. 2015;26(6):715–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Koch GK, Gallucci GO, Lee SJ. Accuracy in the digital workflow: from data acquisition to the digitally milled cast. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(6):749–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Lee W-S, Park J-K, Kim J-H, Kim H-Y, Kim W-C, Yu C-H. New approach to accuracy verification of 3D surface models: an analysis of point cloud coordinates. J Prosthodont Res. 2016;60(2):98–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryRestorative Dentistry, UCLA School of DentistryLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.International Center for Oral RehabilitationRomeItaly
  3. 3.University of Rome Tor VergataRomeItaly
  4. 4.Surgical Implant DentistryLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations