Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
5.5
2.5
Journals
Applied Sciences
Special Issues
Recent Advances in Digital Dentistry and Oral Implantology
applsci-logo
Submit to Special Issue Submit Abstract to Special Issue Review for Applied Sciences Propose a Special Issue

Journal Menu

► Journal Menu

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser
share announcement

Recent Advances in Digital Dentistry and Oral Implantology

A special issue of Applied Sciences (ISSN 2076-3417). This special issue belongs to the section "Applied Dentistry and Oral Sciences".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 20 August 2025 | Viewed by 8404

Special Issue Editors

Prof. Dr. Mario Taba Jr.

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14040-900, SP, Brazil
Interests: periodontal; regeneration; periodontitis; peri-implantitis; biologic; scaffold
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Dr. Erick Ricardo Silva

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, São Paulo 14040-904, Brazil
Interests: bone substitute biomaterial; dental implants
Dr. Ester Alves Ferreira Bordini

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Ribeirão Preto School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil
Interests: dental materials; oral rehabilitation

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The transformative impact of digital technologies in dentistry, particularly in the field of oral implantology, reflects our pursuit of excellence in patient care. The integration of digital workflows has not only streamlined diagnostic and treatment planning processes but has also introduced a new era of precision and predictability in dental procedures. The advent of cone beam computed tomography and intra-oral scanners has been pivotal, providing clinicians with detailed three-dimensional images that facilitate meticulous planning and execution for dental implants. The synergy of virtual planning and artificial intelligence has further augmented the capabilities of dental professionals, offering tools that simulate various clinical scenarios and enhance decision-making processes. This fusion of technology and expertise is revolutionizing educational paradigms, equipping students with an enhanced understanding of complex procedures through virtual simulations. The comprehensive approach enabled through virtual implant planning extends to prosthetic setup and guided implant surgery, ensuring that each phase of treatment is executed with the utmost accuracy. 

Going forward, the continuous evolution of digital dentistry will continue to attract researchers and practitioners and remain at the forefront of technological advancements. Staying updated on these developments represents a commitment to delivering superior care. 

In light of this, this Special Issue, “Recent Advances in Digital Dentistry and Oral Implantology”, will serve as a platform for sharing innovative research and clinical experiences, fostering a collaborative environment where knowledge and expertise converge to achieve new standards in dental practice.

Prof. Dr. Mario Taba Jr.
Dr. Erick Ricardo Silva
Dr. Ester Alves Ferreira Bordini
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Applied Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • digital workflow
  • dental implants
  • implantology
  • treatment plan

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (5 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review, Other

15 pages, 1695 KiB  
Article
Reconstructive Therapy in Patients with Peri-Implantitis in a University Dental Hospital: A Preliminary Retrospective Case Series Focusing on Complications
by Ahmad Alahmari, Xavier Costa-Berenguer, Rui Figueiredo, Eduard Valmaseda-Castellón, Alba Sánchez-Torres and Marta García-García
Appl. Sci. 2025, 15(14), 8040; https://doi.org/10.3390/app15148040 - 18 Jul 2025
Viewed by 357
Abstract
Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory disease-causing bone loss around dental implants, often requiring reconstructive surgical therapies to reduce probing depth and regenerate bone. However, such surgeries are frequently complicated by postoperative issues. This retrospective case series aimed to identify the main postoperative complications following [...] Read more.
Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory disease-causing bone loss around dental implants, often requiring reconstructive surgical therapies to reduce probing depth and regenerate bone. However, such surgeries are frequently complicated by postoperative issues. This retrospective case series aimed to identify the main postoperative complications following the reconstructive treatment of peri-implant bone defects in peri-implantitis patients. Data from 14 patients with 21 affected implants were analyzed, including demographics, oral hygiene, surgical techniques, and complications such as wound dehiscence, membrane exposure, and infections. Wound dehiscence was measured using Image J® software version 1.54. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed. The results showed that 11 implants (52.4%; 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 29% to 76%) in nine patients (57.1%; 95%CI = 27% to 87%) developed soft tissue dehiscence after one week, with membrane exposure observed in 4 implants. Dehiscence was significantly associated with mandibular implant location (p = 0.003), poor interproximal hygiene (p = 0.008), and membrane exposure (p = 0.034). No postoperative infections were recorded. In conclusion, more than half of peri-implantitis patients undergoing reconstructive surgery experience wound dehiscence, particularly in cases involving mandible, poor hygiene, and membrane exposure. This complication might compromise bone regeneration and reduce the treatment success rate. These results should be interpreted cautiously due to study design limitations (retrospective design, lack of a control group, and small sample size). Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Digital Dentistry and Oral Implantology)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 2489 KiB  
Article
Trueness of Implant Positioning Using Intraoral Scanning and Dental Photogrammetry for Full-Arch Implant-Supported Rehabilitations: An In Vitro Study
by João Carlos Faria, Manuel António Sampaio-Fernandes, Susana João Oliveira, Rodrigo Malheiro, João Carlos Sampaio-Fernandes and Maria Helena Figueiral
Appl. Sci. 2025, 15(14), 8016; https://doi.org/10.3390/app15148016 - 18 Jul 2025
Viewed by 220
Abstract
This in vitro study aims to compare the trueness of digital impressions obtained using two intraoral scanners (IOS) and one photogrammetry device for full-arch implant-supported rehabilitations. According to the Caramês Classification I, three models were produced with Straumann implants arranged in different spatial [...] Read more.
This in vitro study aims to compare the trueness of digital impressions obtained using two intraoral scanners (IOS) and one photogrammetry device for full-arch implant-supported rehabilitations. According to the Caramês Classification I, three models were produced with Straumann implants arranged in different spatial distributions: Option A with six implants and Options B and C with four implants each. The three models were scanned using a 12-megapixel scanner to create digital master casts. For each reference model, 30 digital impressions were acquired: 10 with the 3Shape Trios 3 intraoral scanner, 10 with the Medit i500 intraoral scanner, and 10 with the PIC Dental photogrammetry device. Trueness was assessed through best-fit superimpositions between the digital master casts and the corresponding virtual models. The Shapiro–Wilk test was applied to assess the normality of the data distribution, and Levene’s test was used to evaluate the homogeneity of variances. The non-parametric Kruskal–Wallis test was employed to compare group differences, with post hoc adjustments made using the Bonferroni correction. A significance threshold of p = 0.05 was adopted for all statistical tests. Statistically significant differences were observed in the root mean square values among the three devices. The Medit i500 demonstrated the highest trueness, with a median (interquartile range) deviation of 24.45 (18.18) µm, whereas the PIC Dental exhibited the lowest trueness, with a median deviation of 49.45 (9.17) µm. Among the implant distribution, the Option C showed the best trueness, with a median deviation of 19.00 (27.83). Considering the results of this in vitro study, intraoral scanners demonstrated comparable trueness, whereas the photogrammetry-based system exhibited lower trueness values. Additionally, a smaller number of implants and reduced inter-implant distances were associated with improved trueness in digital impressions for full-arch implant rehabilitation. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Digital Dentistry and Oral Implantology)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research, Other

15 pages, 690 KiB  
Review
Accuracy of Different Systems of Guided Implant Surgery and Methods for Quantification: A Systematic Review
by Nataly Marquez Bautista, Cristina Meniz-García, Carmen López-Carriches, Luis Sánchez-Labrador, Jorge Cortés-Bretón Brinkmann and Cristina Madrigal Martínez-Pereda
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14(24), 11479; https://doi.org/10.3390/app142411479 - 10 Dec 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2954
Abstract
The aim of this systematic review was to assess the scientific literature on the accuracy of guided implant surgery and the methods used for its quantification. Two reviewers searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant articles published before 2023. Two methodological [...] Read more.
The aim of this systematic review was to assess the scientific literature on the accuracy of guided implant surgery and the methods used for its quantification. Two reviewers searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant articles published before 2023. Two methodological quality-assessment tools were used to assess the quality of the studies included. Inter-investigator reliability was verified using kappa statistics. Twenty-three clinical studies out of the 3299 articles initially identified met the inclusion criteria. The “radiographic matching method” and “digital registration method” were used to assess accuracy in guided surgery. The mean angular, coronal, and apical deviations of mucosa-supported guides ranged from 2.7° to 5.14°, 0.87 mm to 2.05 mm, and 1.08 mm to 2.28 mm, respectively. With bone-supported guides, these ranged from 2.49° to 5.08°, 0.71 mm to 1.60, and 0.77 mm to 1.65 mm, respectively. In tooth-supported guides, deviations were from 2.5° to 5.62°, 0.39 mm to 1.63 mm and 0.28 mm, and 1.84 mm, respectively. Regardless of the evaluation method, all systems exhibit some error. The minimum and maximum deviation ranges found between the planned and placed implants show that, although deviations occur, guided surgery is not far from accurate. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Digital Dentistry and Oral Implantology)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research, Review

16 pages, 4574 KiB  
Systematic Review
Intraoral Scanning Versus Conventional Methods for Obtaining Full-Arch Implant-Supported Prostheses: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis
by Fernanda L. Vieira, Maísa Carnietto, José R. A. Cerqueira Filho, Ester A. F. Bordini, Hiskell F. F. Oliveira, Thiago A. Pegoraro and Joel F. Santiago Junior
Appl. Sci. 2025, 15(2), 533; https://doi.org/10.3390/app15020533 - 8 Jan 2025
Viewed by 1452
Abstract
There is still no consensus on whether intraoral scanning for producing full-arch implant-supported prostheses is effective. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to analyze clinical studies that evaluated intraoral scanning versus conventional impression to obtain rehabilitation of full-arch fixed prostheses and removable. Registration was [...] Read more.
There is still no consensus on whether intraoral scanning for producing full-arch implant-supported prostheses is effective. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to analyze clinical studies that evaluated intraoral scanning versus conventional impression to obtain rehabilitation of full-arch fixed prostheses and removable. Registration was carried out in the PROSPERO database (CRD: 42020152197). Searches were performed in 11 databases. Review Manager 7.2 (2024) software was used for the quantitative analysis stage (α = 0.05). Bias analysis was conducted using the ROBINS-I and ROB scales, and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE scale. The initial search showed 33,975 abstracts and titles, from which, after applying the inclusion/exclusion criteria, 11 clinical studies were selected. Based on the studies collected, it was observed that there was no difference in the comparison between the digital (DG) and conventional (CG) groups for the following criteria: technical and biological complication rates and marginal bone loss (p > 0.05). The analysis of clinical execution time highlights a notable advantage of the DG over the CG at both scanned patient and implant levels (p < 0.05). Nevertheless, CG achieved fewer retakes than the DG (p < 0.05), demonstrating its reliability in execution. It is concluded that the survival rates of full-arch fixed prostheses produced using intraoral scanning are comparable to those achieved with traditional impression techniques, providing a reliable option for patients. However, further clinical studies are necessary due to the variability in clinical protocols. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Digital Dentistry and Oral Implantology)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 6904 KiB  
Systematic Review
Regenerating Alveolar Bone for Implant Placement: The Efficacy of Autogenous Mineralized Dentin Matrix—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
by Madalena Meném, Alexandre Santos and Paulo Mascarenhas
Appl. Sci. 2024, 14(21), 10018; https://doi.org/10.3390/app142110018 - 2 Nov 2024
Viewed by 2388
Abstract
The preservation of the alveolar ridge has gained increasing importance for various types of rehabilitation, including dental implant placement. Consequently, researchers have explored different bone grafts, such as mineralized dentin matrix grafts. However, a comprehensive review of the efficacy of autogenous mineralized dentin [...] Read more.
The preservation of the alveolar ridge has gained increasing importance for various types of rehabilitation, including dental implant placement. Consequently, researchers have explored different bone grafts, such as mineralized dentin matrix grafts. However, a comprehensive review of the efficacy of autogenous mineralized dentin (AMD) for alveolar ridge preservation remains lacking. In this review, we evaluated the efficacy of AMD as a method for alveolar ridge preservation in cases of delayed implant placement. A comprehensive search through PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and B-on repositories was conducted without time constraints up to July 2024 to identify peer-reviewed human studies. These studies assessed the percentage of newly formed bone and residual graft following bone regeneration with AMD grafts after tooth extraction, specifically in the context of delayed implant placement. Our analysis included four selected studies involving 55 patients and 67 sockets. The findings suggest that AMD grafts resulted in an average (and 95% confidence interval) of 43.8% [36.6%, 50.8%] newly formed bone, and delayed implant placement was a feasible surgical option for all patients. Although the available literature is scarce, AMD grafting has yielded promising outcomes as a method for bone reconstruction. Nevertheless, additional randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups are required to substantiate these findings. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Recent Advances in Digital Dentistry and Oral Implantology)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-5
Back to TopTop