GAJRC | Global Academic Journal of Dentistry and Oral Health

Journal Name:	Global Academic Journal of Dentistry and Oral Health
Abbr. Title:	Glob Acad J Dent Oral Health
ISSN(Print):	2706-8994
ISSN(Online):	2707-8868
Frequency:	Bi-Monthly
Language:	English
Chief Editor:	Dr. Rubi Kataki
Publisher:	Scholars Middle East Publishers
Country of Origin:	United Arab Emirates

Journal Name:

Global Academic Journal of Dentistry and Oral Health

Abbr. Title:

Glob Acad J Dent Oral Health

ISSN(Print):

2706-8994

ISSN(Online):

2707-8868

Frequency:

Bi-Monthly

Language:

English

Chief Editor:

Dr. Rubi Kataki

Publisher:

Scholars Middle East Publishers

Country of Origin:

United Arab Emirates

The following is a clinical case of a screw-retained prosthesis on two implants with different designs and manufacturers. A 73-year-old man visited the dentist in January 2023 to rehabilitate the edentulous right area of the mandible. In December 2018 another dentist placed implants (Biohorizons, Madrid. Spain) in positions 45 and 46 with a metal-porcelain bridge over both. In 2022 he lost implant 45 (Biohorizons tapered internal 3.8 x 9) and with it also the bridge, although he still had implant 46 (Biohorizons tapered short 4.6 x 7.5). On the day of surgery, a simple opening flap was performed and drills were used sequentially until a 4 x 8 mm Galimplant IPX implant (Sarria, Spain) was placed in position 45. After a period of four months, the impression abutments of implants 46 and 45 were attached with dental floss and flowable composite, and an open-tray impression was taken. One week later, the screwed metal-porcelain fixed prosthesis was placed on both implants. It is difficult to find bibliographic information about fixed prostheses on implants manufactured by different companies and placed in the same patient. The placement of a prosthesis on two implants from different manufacturers is not a complication, but rather an unscheduled inconvenience. The clinical case presented allows us to point out that a fixed prosthesis on implants from different manufacturers can give excellent results.

Dentistry incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming a reality and not just a myth. By using machines to mimic intelligent human behaviour, AI has significantly changed the medical and dental fields. This contemporary and information-driven innovative technology is gaining worldwide popularity due to its significant impact on intelligence innovation. AI is a lifesaver in dentistry, specifically in prosthodontics, which involves the restoration and reconstruction of missing teeth using implants for permanent and removable prostheses. The technology aids in designing prostheses, fabricating functional maxillofacial appliances, patient documentation, diagnosis, treatment planning, and patient management, allowing oral healthcare professionals to work more efficiently. AI cannot, however, take the position of a dental surgeon because their work requires more than just diagnosing diseases; it also entails treating patients and correlating findings with other clinical data. A new paradigm in dentistry has emerged because of the integration of AI and digitization, with potential futures. Dental surgeons should concentrate on gathering and entering accurate data into their database for AI usage in dentistry shortly to get beyond the only obstacle to the deployment of AI, which is the availability of insufficient and inaccurate data. To diagnose problems and develop patient-specific prostheses, the present narrative review article examines numerous uses of AI in prosthodontics and oral implantology, as well as its current limitations and potential future applications.

This report presents the case of a 62-year-old man, who went to the dentist's office in May 2022 to rehabilitate the edentulous maxillary area. It was planned to place implants in positions 16, 14, 12, 22, 24, and 25, with a delayed technique in the placement of the fixed prosthesis. The implant 24 had a divergent position towards buccal. There was also an asymmetry in the prosthesis, since implants 24 and 25 were closer to each other, to avoid the proximity of the maxillary sinus on the left side, while piece 16 could be placed on the right side. The non-parallel placement of an implant is not a complication, but rather an unscheduled inconvenience. In many cases, it depends on the availability of bone to be able to place the implants in the positions programmed as ideal. To improve esthetics in screw channel 24, a making agent was applied. We have found it more reasonable to place tooth 16, even though it results in an asymmetric prosthesis. It is a tooth that is useful for the patient to chew and the asymmetry is minimal, concerning the whole of the prosthesis. Bone limitations in width and depth condition the position and angulation of the implants. The divergence and asymmetry of these implants also condition the way of making the fixed prosthesis on them. The choice between a cemented or screw-retained prosthesis is not essential, since in both cases a good oral, functional, and aesthetic restoration can be made.

July 12, 2022

A Case of Cleidocranial Dysplasia with Historical and Current Review

Dr. Shishira Surapu Reddy, Dr. Anulekha C.K, Dr. M. Mounika Reddy, Dr.Avinash Tejasvi.M.L, Dr. Archana Pokala, Dr. Mohammed Malik Afroz
Glob Acad J Dent Oral Health; 2022, 4(3): 13-18
DOI : 10.36348/gajdoh.2022.v04i03.001