{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: An Investigative Study on the Oral Health Condition of Individuals Undergoing 3D-Printed Customized Dental Implantation.
{Author}: Ma H;Kou Y;Hu H;Wu Y;Tang Z;
{Journal}: J Funct Biomater
{Volume}: 15
{Issue}: 6
{Year}: 2024 Jun 5
{Factor}: 4.901
{DOI}: 10.3390/jfb15060156
{Abstract}: <B>BACKGROUND: </B>The advent of three-dimensional (3D) printing technology has revolutionized the field of dentistry, enabling the precise fabrication of dental implants. By utilizing 3D printing, dentists can devise implant plans prior to surgery and accurately translate them into clinical procedures, thereby eliminating the need for multiple surgical procedures, reducing surgical discomfort, and enhancing surgical efficiency. Furthermore, the utilization of digital 3D-printed implant guides facilitates immediate restoration by precisely translating preoperative implant design plans, enabling the preparation of temporary restorations preoperatively.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>This comprehensive study aimed to assess the postoperative oral health status of patients receiving personalized 3D-printed implants and investigate the advantages and disadvantages between the 3D-printed implant and conventional protocol. Additionally, variance analysis was employed to delve into the correlation between periodontal status and overall oral health. Comparisons of continuous paired parameters were made by t-test.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>The results of our study indicate a commendable one-year survival rate of over 94% for 3D-printed implants. This finding was corroborated by periodontal examinations and follow-up surveys using the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) questionnaire, revealing excellent postoperative oral health status among patients. Notably, OHIP-14 scores were significantly higher in patients with suboptimal periodontal health, suggesting a strong link between periodontal health and overall oral well-being. Moreover, we found that the operating time (14.41 ± 4.64 min) was less statistically significant than for the control group (31.76 ± 6.83 min).<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>In conclusion, personalized 3D-printed implant surgery has emerged as a reliable clinical option, offering a viable alternative to traditional implant methods. However, it is imperative to gather further evidence-based medical support through extended follow-up studies to validate its long-term efficacy and safety.