Fabrication, workflow and delivery of reconstruction: Summary and consensus statements of group 4. The 6th EAO Consensus Conference 2021.

Jokstad, Asbjorn; Pjetursson, Bjarni E; Mühlemann, Sven; Wismeijer, Daniel; Wolfart, Stefan; Fehmer, Vincent; Frederik Güth, Jan; Paterno Holtzman, Lucrezia; Hämmerle, Christoph H F; Makarov, Nikolay; Meijer, Henny J A; Milinkovic, Iva; Sailer, Irena; Spitznagel, Frank A; Vandeweghe, Stefan; Van de Velde, Tommie; Zwahlen, Marcel; Giertmuehlen, Petra C (2021). Fabrication, workflow and delivery of reconstruction: Summary and consensus statements of group 4. The 6th EAO Consensus Conference 2021. Clinical oral implants research, 32(Suppl 21), pp. 336-341. Wiley-Blackwell 10.1111/clr.13797

Preview

Text Clinical_Oral_Implants_Res_-_2021_-_Jokstad_-_Fabrication_workflow_and_delivery_of_reconstruction_Summary_and_consensus.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works (CC-BY-NC-ND). Download (464kB) | Preview

OBJECTIVES

To report assessments of four systematic reviews (SRs) on (i) clinical outcomes of all-ceramic implant-supported crowns (iSCs), (ii) production time, effectiveness, and costs of computer-assisted manufacturing (CAM), (iii) computer-assisted implant planning and surgery (CAIPS) time and costs, and (iv) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An author group consisting of experienced clinicians and content experts discussed and evaluated the SRs and formulated consensus on the main findings, statements, clinical recommendations, and need for future research.

RESULTS

All four SRs were conducted and reported according to PRISMA and detailed comprehensive search strategies in at least three bibliometric databases and hand searching. The search strategies were deemed reproducible. Variation was noted regarding language restrictions and inclusion of grey literature, but the search comprehensiveness appeared persuasive. The SRs included bias risk assessments of the primary studies, and their study methodology impacted the interpretations of the extracted data.

CONCLUSIONS

(i) There is limited evidence (49 NRCT) showing that veneered and monolithic all-ceramic iSCs have excellent outcomes observed up to 3 years. (ii) There is no evidence evaluating production time and effectiveness comparing subtractive and additive CAM of implant models, abutments and crowns. (iii) There is limited evidence (4 RCT) that CAIPS involves more time and costs when considering the entire workflow and for diagnostics, manufacturing, and insertion of the restoration. Time seems to be the decisive factor for higher costs. (iv) Patients´ comfort increase when optical compared to conventional impressions is used for fabricating iSCs and short-span FPDs (2 RCT, 5 NRCT).

Interest & Impact

Downloads

228 since deposited on 23 Jun 2021
99 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item