Mariano Sanz1, Blas Noguerol2, Ignacio Sanz-Sanchez1, Christoph H F Hammerle3, Henning Schliephake4, Frank Renouard5, Alberto Sicilia6, Luca Cordaro7, Ronald Jung3, Bjorn Klinge8, Pascal Valentini9, Gil Alcoforado10, Turker Ornekol11, Bjarni Pjetursson12, Irena Sailer13, Isabella Rochietta14, José Manuel Navarro15, Lisa Heitz-Mayfield16, Helena Francisco17. 1. ETEP Research Group, Faculty of Odontology, University Complutense of Madrid, Madrid, Spain. 2. Clinica Noguerol, Granada, Spain. 3. Clinic of Fixed & Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Zurich, Switzerland. 4. OMF Surgery, George-Augusta-University, Göttingen, Germany. 5. Cabinet RENOUARD, Paris, France. 6. Universidad de Oviedo, Section of Periodontology, University Clinic of Dentistry, Oviedo, Spain. 7. Eastman Dental Hospital, University Policlinic Umberto I Rome, Rome, Italy. 8. Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden. 9. Université de Corse Pascal Paoli, Corte, France. 10. Department of Periodontology, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal. 11. Cosmodent Center for Dentistry and Dental Implants, Istanbul, Turkey. 12. Department of Reconstructive Dentistry, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland. 13. Division of Fixed Prosthodontics and Occlusion, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. 14. The London Center for Implant and Aesthetic Dentistry, London, UK. 15. Brånemark Osseointegration Center, Las Palmas, Spain. 16. The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia. 17. University of Lisbon School of Dental Medicine, Lisbon, Portugal.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the potential trends for the year 2030 in dental implant dentistry in Europe using the Delphi methodology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A steering committee and a management team of experts in implant dentistry were created and validated a questionnaire including 60 questions, divided in eight topics. The survey was conducted in two rounds using an anonymous questionnaire, which provided the participants in the second round with the results of the first. Each question had three possible answers, and the results were expressed as percentages. RESULTS: A total of 138 experts were invited to participate in the survey. From all the invited experts, 52 answered in both the first and second rounds. Three different consensus categories were established based on the percentage of agreement: no consensus (<65%); moderate consensus (65%-85%); and high consensus (≥86%). Within the topic categories, a consensus was reached (mainly moderate consensus) for the majority of questions discussed among experts during a face to face consensus meeting. However, consensus was not reached for a small number of questions/topics. CONCLUSIONS: About 82% of the questions reached consensus. The consensus points towards a lower number of implants to replace chewing units, with implants surfaces made of bioactive materials with reduced micro-roughness using mainly customized abutments with polished surfaces and an internal implant-abutment connection (85%). CBCT-3D technologies will be the main tool for pre-surgical implant placement diagnosis together with direct digital restorative workflows. There will be an increase in the incidence of peri-implantitis, although there will be more efficient interventions its treatment and prevention.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the potential trends for the year 2030 in dental implant dentistry in Europe using the Delphi methodology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A steering committee and a management team of experts in implant dentistry were created and validated a questionnaire including 60 questions, divided in eight topics. The survey was conducted in two rounds using an anonymous questionnaire, which provided the participants in the second round with the results of the first. Each question had three possible answers, and the results were expressed as percentages. RESULTS: A total of 138 experts were invited to participate in the survey. From all the invited experts, 52 answered in both the first and second rounds. Three different consensus categories were established based on the percentage of agreement: no consensus (<65%); moderate consensus (65%-85%); and high consensus (≥86%). Within the topic categories, a consensus was reached (mainly moderate consensus) for the majority of questions discussed among experts during a face to face consensus meeting. However, consensus was not reached for a small number of questions/topics. CONCLUSIONS: About 82% of the questions reached consensus. The consensus points towards a lower number of implants to replace chewing units, with implants surfaces made of bioactive materials with reduced micro-roughness using mainly customized abutments with polished surfaces and an internal implant-abutment connection (85%). CBCT-3D technologies will be the main tool for pre-surgical implant placement diagnosis together with direct digital restorative workflows. There will be an increase in the incidence of peri-implantitis, although there will be more efficient interventions its treatment and prevention.
Authors: Daniel Aiham Ghazali; Arnaud Richard; Arnaud Chaudet; Christophe Choquet; Maximilien Guericolas; Enrique Casalino Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-11-12 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Tim Hilgenfeld; Alexander Juerchott; Johann M E Jende; Peter Rammelsberg; Sabine Heiland; Martin Bendszus; Franz S Schwindling Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2020-09-22 Impact factor: 5.315