Browsing by Author "Shraddha Shilpi"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

COMPARING THE EFFICACY OF OSSEODENSIFICATION OVER CONVENTIONAL DRILLING TECHNIQUE ON IMPLANT STABILITY AND BONE DENSITY IN LOW BONE DENSITY SITES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
(Elsevier Inc., 2025) Shraddha Shilpi; Monika Bansal; Mahesh R. Khairnar; Gokila Vani Su; Zainab Akram; Rashika M; Sakshi Agarwal
Purpose of the research: To assess the efficacy of osseodensification (OD) over conventional drilling technique (CD) on implant stability and bone density in low bone density sites. Materials and methods: An electronic and manual search were conducted to analyze the effect of OD over CD technique on implant stability and bone density in human-based randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized controlled trials (NRCTs). The risk of bias was assessed using (RoB 2.0) and (ROBINS-I) tools for RCTs and NRCTs respectively. The meta-analysis was applied with RevMan 5.4, using the random-fixed effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by a Q test and quantified with I2 statistics. Results: Our literature search identified 1454 publications, of which only 6 met all the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of the included studies showed that the implant stability quotient (ISQ) was greater in OD than in the CD group without being statistically significant both immediately and at the follow-up period after implant placement, with a standardized mean difference of 2.13 [95%CI = −0.08, 4.35] with P = .06 and 1.81 [95%CI = −0.41, 4.03] with P = .11 respectively. The difference in bone density in the OD compared to the CD group was statistically significant, immediately after implant placement with a standardized mean difference of 2.14 [95%CI = 0.68, 3.59] with P = .004 and nonsignificant at 3 to 7 months with a standardized mean difference of 1.54 [95%CI = −0.34, 3.43] with P = .11. Conclusion: The findings of the present review and meta-analysis show that dental implants placed using the OD technique reveal greater implant stability and improved bone density in areas with low bone density compared to the CD technique. However, more clinical studies are needed to validate the findings. © 2025 Elsevier Inc.
Peri-Implant Esthetics in Focus: Comparing Anodized Titanium and Zirconium Dioxide Abutments in a Randomized Clinical Trial
(John Wiley and Sons Inc, 2025) Sakshi Agarwal; Farhan Durrani; Aishwarya Pandey; M. Rashika; Shraddha Shilpi; Dhanraj Meena
Objective: Achieving optimal esthetics remains challenging due to limited comparative evidence between pink-anodized titanium and zirconium dioxide abutments. The objective of this clinical study was to evaluate the optical outcomes of pink-anodized titanium and zirconium dioxide abutments in the esthetic region. Methods: Twenty-two subjects with an edentulous site in the maxillary esthetic region with a tooth present mesially and distally were selected for implant surgery along with hard and soft tissue augmentation. Group A received a pink-anodized titanium abutment with a layered lithium disilicate single crown. Group B received a zirconium dioxide abutment with the same prosthesis material. The contralateral natural tooth served as the control group. Optical outcomes were assessed using a spectrophotometer. The CIELAB color coordinates (Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage) were recorded to calculate ΔE values. Vernier calipers, along with an endodontic file, were used to measure the peri-implant soft tissue thickness. The Pink Esthetic Score (PES) was evaluated using digital images of 22 single-tooth implant crowns to assess the surrounding soft tissue esthetics. Results: Zirconia abutments (Group A) demonstrated superior optical outcomes compared to pink-anodized titanium abutments (Group B). The ΔE values for Group A at the peri-implant soft tissue, coronal, and midfacial crown levels were significantly lower compared to Group B. Soft tissue thickness (STT) increased over time in both groups, with a slight increase in Group B. The Pink Esthetic Score (PES) also improved with recall visits at each evaluation. Conclusion: Zirconia abutments provided superior esthetic outcomes compared to pink-anodized titanium abutments, with significantly lower color differences (ΔE) and higher Pink Esthetic Scores (PES). Although pink-anodized titanium abutments showed increased soft tissue thickening with time, zirconia abutments remained the more favorable option for esthetically demanding cases. Clinical Trials Registry: (CTRI No. CTRI/2024/03/064442). © 2025 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Periodontal and prosthetic perspective of implant-supported full-arch prostheses with monolithic zirconia and porcelain fused metal restorative materials: A three-year retrospective case series
(Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2025) Farhan Durrani; Aishwarya Pandey; Rashika Muralisekar; Sakshi Agarwal; Shraddha Shilpi; Kajol Kumari Rajak
Full-mouth implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation for failing dentition is a complex, multifactorial process influenced by prosthetic materials and peri-implant periodontal health. Traditionally, porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM) frameworks have ensured functional stability and acceptable esthetics; however, the advent of monolithic zirconia layered with porcelain has introduced enhanced mechanical strength and esthetic appeal. This retrospective case series evaluated the 3-year clinical outcomes of full-arch implant-supported prostheses fabricated using either monolithic zirconia or PFM in edentulous patients, focusing on peri-implant soft-tissue health, marginal bone loss, and prosthetic complications. Ten edentulous patients rehabilitated with full-arch implant-supported prostheses were included and assessed clinically and radiographically for peri-implant tissue health, plaque accumulation, probing depth, bleeding on probing, marginal bone levels, and technical complications over a 3-year follow-up. Both prosthetic materials demonstrated stable peri-implant tissue health and 100% implant survival at the 3-year mark. Monolithic zirconia restorations exhibited reduced plaque accumulation, stable bone levels, and absence of prosthetic complications, whereas the PFM group showed minor technical issues such as porcelain chipping and screw loosening. Within the limitations of this study, both materials proved clinically viable for full-arch implant rehabilitation; however, monolithic zirconia showed a trend toward superior biological and mechanical outcomes. Larger, prospective studies are warranted to validate these preliminary findings. © 2025 Indian Society of Periodontology.