Purpose: The aims of this clinical study were to retrospectively evaluate implant survival, patient satisfaction, and radiographic, clinical, and esthetic outcomes following single-implant treatment. Materials and Methods: Eighty-seven patients, with a total of 126 implants (XiVE S, Dentsply Implants), who received single implant-retained crowns between 2004 and 2011 were retrospectively evaluated. Implant survival, marginal bone levels (MBL), changes in implant/mesial tooth vertical relationship, pink esthetic score (PES), white esthetic score (WES), patient assessment of the esthetics (visual analog scale), and oral health impact profile (OHIP-14) were evaluated. Results: Altogether, 59 patients with a total of 85 implants attended a final clinical and radiographic follow-up examination. The mean ages of males and females at implant placement were 19.78 and 22.58 years, respectively. The mean total follow-up time from the implant surgical date was 7.51 years. The 5-year implant clinical survival rate (CSR) was 98.4% (95% CI: 96.3%–100%), and crown CSR was 91.8% (95% CI: 86.3%–97.3%). The overall mean change in MBL was –0.19 mm. No significant differences were found between the different implant diameters (3.0, 3.4, and 3.8 mm) with regard to change in MBL. Mean increase in implant infraposition was 0.13 mm. With regard to esthetics, mean initial and final total PES were 9.61 and 11.49, respectively (P < .001). The mean WES was 6.48 at follow-up. Patients’ mean assessment of soft tissue esthetics and implant-supported crown appearance were 73.5 and 82.1 (maximum score 100). At the follow-up examination, the additive OHIP-14 score was 16.11. Conclusion: This retrospective study of XiVE S implants found excellent survival rates and showed good clinical outcomes concerning patient-centered findings, esthetics, and marginal bone preservation. In context, it is important to stress that this study consisted of mostly young patients with agenesis who were treated by experienced clinicians.

Background: Immediate loading of single implants is generally considered a reliable procedure. Purpose: The objective of the present prospective randomized clinical study was to compare the overall treatment outcome following immediate loading (IL) and delayed loading (DL) of single implants after 1 year of follow-up. Materials and Methods: Patients with a missing maxillary tooth (15-25) were randomly assigned to IL or DL. The protocol included implant installation in healed sites, immediate loading, delayed loading, temporary screw-retained restoration, and replacement with a permanent single implant crown. Outcome measures were implant survival, marginal bone level, soft tissue changes, papillae index, pink, and white esthetic score (PES and WES), patient judged aesthetics, and oral health impact profile (OHiP-14). Results: Implant survival rate was 100% and 96% for IL and DL, respectively. Implant success rate was 96% and 88% for IL and DL, respectively. Statistically significant lower papilla index scores were found in the IL group at temporary crown and definitive crown placement. An overall statistically significant improvement after 12 months for PES, WES and OHIP-14 was found. Conclusion: This prospective randomized study showed that single implants in the maxilla can present satisfactory results with respect to either immediate loading or delayed loading after 12 months.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Different factors influence the degree of deviation in dental implant position after computed tomography-guided surgery. The surgical guide-manufacturing process with desktop 3D printers is such a factor, but its accuracy has not been fully evaluated.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the deviation in final dental implant position after the use of surgical guides fabricated from 2 different desktop 3D printers using a digital workflow.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty 3D-printed resin models were prepared with missing maxillary premolar. After preoperative planning, 10 surgical guides were produced with a stereolithography printer and 10 with a digital light-processing (DLP) printer. A guided surgery was performed; 20 dental implants (3.8×12 mm) were installed, and a digital scan of the dental implants was made. Deviations between the planned and final position of the dental implants were evaluated for both the groups.

RESULTS: A statistically significant difference between stereolithography and DLP were found for deviation at entry point (P=.023) and the vertical implant position (P=.009). Overall lower deviations were found for the guides from the DLP printer, with the exception of deviation in horizontal implant position.

CONCLUSIONS: The tested desktop 3D printers were able to produce surgical guides with similar deviations with regard to the final dental implant position, but the DLP printer proved more accurate concerning deviations at entry point and vertical implant position.

Purpose: To compare clinical and esthetic outcomes between immediately loaded single implants placed with and without a fully guided surgical procedure. Materials and Methods: Patients with a missing maxillary tooth (second premolar to second premolar) were considered for inclusion in this 1-year prospective nonrandomized study. Exclusion criteria were general health contraindications for oral surgery besides the need for bone grafting or ridge augmentation. One group received digital implant planning, fully guided surgery, and immediate loading (DIL). The other group received freehand surgery and immediate loading (IL). Outcome measures were implant survival, marginal bone loss, soft tissue changes, papilla index, pink and white esthetic scores (PES and WES, respectively), and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Results: Two of 21 implants failed in the DIL group soon after placement, resulting in a 1-year implant survival rate of 90.5%, while no implants failed in the IL group. Significantly higher papilla index scores and lower soft tissue changes were found for the DIL group compared to the IL group. No differences were found after 1 year regarding marginal bone loss, PES, WES, or PROMs. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, immediate loading in combination with fully guided surgery might negatively affect implant survival. Immediate loading, fully guided surgery, and a digital workflow appear to have a positive effect on early soft tissue adaptation.