[A pilot clinical study of immediate provisionalization with a chairside computer aided design and computer aided...

Objective: To evaluate the primary clinical outcomes of immediate provisionalization with a monolithic crown utilizing a novel chairside computer aided design and computer aided manufacture (CAD/CAM) workflow for single tooth immediate implant placement. Methods: This pilot study was a prospective within-subjects design. Thirteen consecutive patients were included and diagnosed with untreatable single incisor or premolar with fine general and local anatomical conditions. The trial was conducted at Department of Implantology, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, between January 2016 and June 2016. The teeth were extracted atraumatically and implants were immediately placed in the fresh sockets. Two screw-retained interim crowns were fabricated for the same site utilizing different workflows, a monolithic lithium disilicate (LS2) crown produced by CEREC (Sirona, Germany) chairside CAD/CAM system (CER group) and a manually fabricated resin crown utilizing conventional workflow (CONV group) respectively. The patients were blinded to the group allocation of the two interim crowns. After the clinical try-in for both crowns in a randomized sequence, the patients' level of satisfaction was assessed with a virtual analogue scale (VAS) questionnaire. The restorations chosen by patients themselves were seated in the implants by one experienced prosthodontist. The accuracy, aesthetic effect and clinical time consumption of both groups were compared. Statistical analyses were performed with the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: All patients were treated with atraumatic tooth extraction, immediate implant placement using flapless surgery and immediate provisionalization in a single visit. The interim crowns of both groups could be fitted with or without slight adjustments. For each patient, the interim crown of CER group was chosen to be seated with a relatively higher VAS result. The white esthetic score (WES) results demonstrated no statistically significant difference between CER group (7.5±1.1) and CONV group (7.9±0.9) (P>0.05). The mean total work time was significantly different resulting in (131.9±5.0) min for CER group and (205.2±6.3) min(P<0.05). The major difference lied in the laboratory work time, resulting in (113.5±6.3) min for CER group which was significantly shorter than (185.6±6.6) min for CONV group. As for impression taking time, the CER group (7.5±0.8) min was significantly shorter than CONV group (11.7± 1.1) min (P<0.05). However, analysis for clinical adjustment time showed a significantly longer time for CER group [(11.0±2.1) min vs (8.0±2.8) min, P<0.05]. After 3-6 months of observation, the overall survival rate was 100%. Screw loosening occurred in 4 patients and was tightened again. No other major complication soccurred. Conclusions: The full digital workflow utilizing CEREC chairside CAD/CAM system to fabricate interim crowns after immediate implant placement in one single visit was feasible. It was more time-efficient and could effectively shorten the laboratory work time compared to the conventional workflow. Patients demonstrated high satisfaction and there was no statistical difference in WES results compared to the conventional workflow. Favorable clinical outcomes were gained in this short-term follow-up study.