CAD/CAM Digital & Oral Facial Aesthetics 37th Int’l Dental ConfEx

Abstract

Full arch implant rehabilitations demand meticulous attention to detail both surgically and prosthetically to ensure successful outcomes. With the advent of digital technologies, the dental field faces a critical question: can digital methodologies effectively compete with conventional approaches in achieving accuracy and efficacy? This lecture delves into the comparative landscape between digital and conventional methodologies in full arch implant rehabilitations, focusing on surgical and prosthetic perspectives. Through a comprehensive review of current literature and clinical studies, the inherent inaccuracies associated with each approach are explored. From a surgical standpoint, factors such as implant placement precision, surgical guide fabrication, and intraoperative navigation systems are analyzed. From a prosthetic viewpoint, considerations encompass impression accuracy, CAD/CAM technology utilization, and final prosthesis fit and esthetics. By examining recent literature and clinical studies, this lecture elucidates the strengths and limitations of each approach, shedding light on the evolving paradigm within implant dentistry. By providing clinicians with valuable insights into selecting the most appropriate approach for full arch implant rehabilitations, it contributes to the ongoing discourse surrounding the efficacy of digital solutions in challenging conventional practices within implant dentistry.

Learning Objectives

• Understand Full Arch Implant Rehabilitation: Develop an understanding of the complexity and critical details involved in full arch implant rehabilitations, from both surgical and prosthetic perspectives.
• Compare Digital and Conventional Methodologies: Learn about the specific differences between digital and conventional methodologies in terms of accuracy, efficiency, and clinical outcomes in implant dentistry.
• Evaluate Surgical Precision and Techniques: Analyze how digital technologies, such as surgical guides and intraoperative navigation systems, compare to traditional surgical methods in terms of implant placement precision.
• Assess Prosthetic Outcomes: Explore the accuracy of digital impressions, the utilization of CAD/CAM technology, and the final fit and aesthetics of prostheses compared to conventional techniques.
• Review Clinical Studies and Literature: Gain insights from current clinical studies and literature reviews that evaluate the effectiveness and limitations of digital versus conventional approaches in implant dentistry.
• Critically Assess Inherent Inaccuracies: Identify and discuss the inherent inaccuracies associated with both digital and conventional methodologies to understand their impact on treatment outcomes.
• Make Informed Clinical Decisions: Equip clinicians with the knowledge to choose the most appropriate methodology for full arch implant rehabilitations based on an evidence-based approach.
• Discuss Future Trends in Implant Dentistry: Engage with ongoing research and potential future developments that could influence the choice between digital and conventional methodologies in implant dentistry.