A comparative retrospective study of different surgical guide designs for static computer-assisted implant surgery in posterior single edentulous sites.
CAD/CAM surgical guide
accuracy of implant position
dental implant
static computer-assisted implant surgery
Journal
Clinical oral implants research
ISSN: 1600-0501
Titre abrégé: Clin Oral Implants Res
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 9105713
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2022
Jan 2022
Historique:
revised:
10
08
2021
received:
13
02
2021
accepted:
14
09
2021
pubmed:
30
9
2021
medline:
12
1
2022
entrez:
29
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the accuracy of static Computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) in posterior single edentulous patients using different surgical guide designs. Thirty-seven partially edentulous patients with a total of 54 implants were included in the study. Seventeen implants were included in Group 1-Unbounded Tooth-Mucosa Supported; 18 implants in Group 2-Unbounded Tooth Supported; and 19 implants in Group 3 (Control)-Bounded Tooth Supported. All partially edentulous patients were treated with fully guided implant surgery using the corresponding surgical guide. Discrepancies between the pre-planned and post-operative implant position were evaluated. The mean angular deviation ± standard deviation (SD) was 2.91 ± 1.56°, 3.33 ± 1.72° and 2.25 ± 1.13° for Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The mean ± SD 3D offset at base was 0.66 ± 0.29 mm, 0.77 ± 0.24 mm, and 0.49 ± 0.22 mm; and 3D offset at tip was 0.84 ± 0.45 mm, 1.07 ± 0.38 mm, and 0.75 ± 0.25 mm for Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. No statistically significant differences between groups were found for angular deviation. There were statistically significant differences between Groups 2 and 3 for 3D offset at base (p = .002) and 3D offset at tip (p = .010). Different surgical guide designs for posterior single edentulous areas appear to be associated with the accuracy level of sCAIS. In unbounded sites, having additional posterior attached soft tissue support is preferable.
Substances chimiques
Dental Implants
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
45-52Informations de copyright
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Abduo, J., & Lau, D. (2020). Accuracy of static computer-assisted implant placement in anterior and posterior sites by clinicians new to implant dentistry: in vitro comparison of fully guided, pilot-guided, and freehand protocols. Int J Implant Dent, 6(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-020-0205-3
Bornstein, M. M., Seiffert, C., Maestre-Ferrin, L., Fodich, I., Jacobs, R., Buser, D., & von Arx, T. (2016). An Analysis of frequency, morphology, and locations of maxillary sinus septa using cone beam computed tomography. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 31(2), 280-287. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4188
Derksen, W., Wismeijer, D., Flugge, T., Hassan, B., & Tahmaseb, A. (2019). The accuracy of computer-guided implant surgery with tooth-supported, digitally designed drill guides based on CBCT and intraoral scanning. A prospective cohort study. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 30(10), 1005-1015. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13514
D'haese, J., Ackhurst, J., Wismeijer, D., De Bruyn, H., & Tahmaseb, A. (2017). Current state of the art of computer-guided implant surgery. Periodontology 2000, 73(1), 121-133. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12175
El Kholy, K., Ebenezer, S., Wittneben, J. G., Lazarin, R., Rousson, D., & Buser, D. (2019). Influence of implant macrodesign and insertion connection technology on the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgery. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 21(5), 1073-1079. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12836
El Kholy, K., Janner, S. F. M., Schimmel, M., & Buser, D. (2019). The influence of guided sleeve height, drilling distance, and drilling key length on the accuracy of static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 21(1), 101-107. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12705
El Kholy, K., Lazarin, R., Janner, S. F. M., Faerber, K., Buser, R., & Buser, D. (2019). Influence of surgical guide support and implant site location on accuracy of static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 30(11), 1067-1075. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13520
Gallucci, G. O., Khoynezhad, S., Yansane, A. I., Taylor, J., Buser, D., & Friedland, B. (2017). Influence of the Posterior Mandible Ridge Morphology on Virtual Implant Planning. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 32(4), 801-806. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5546
Herschdorfer, L., Negreiros, W. M., Gallucci, G. O., & Hamilton, A. (2021). Comparison of the accuracy of implants placed with CAD-CAM surgical templates manufactured with various 3D printers: An in vitro study. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 125(6), 905-910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.03.017
Joda, T., Derksen, W., Wittneben, J. G., & Kuehl, S. (2018). Static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS) analysing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), economics and surgical complications: A systematic review. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 29(Suppl 16), 359-373. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13136
Joda, T., & Gallucci, G. O. (2015). The virtual patient in dental medicine. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 26(6), 725-726. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12379
Killip, S., Mahfoud, Z., & Pearce, K. (2004). What is an intracluster correlation coefficient? Crucial concepts for primary care researchers. Annals of Family Medicine, 2(3), 204-208. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.141
Mai, H. N., & Lee, D. H. (2020). Effects of supporting conditions and anchor microscrew on the stabilization of the implant guide template during the drilling process: An in vitro study. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 124(6), 727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.06.033
Papaspyridakos, P., Vazouras, K., Chen, Y. W., Kotina, E., Natto, Z., Kang, K., & Chochlidakis, K. (2020). Digital vs conventional implant impressions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Prosthodontics, 29(8), 660-678. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.13211
Schnutenhaus, S., Edelmann, C., & Rudolph, H. (2021). Does the macro design of an implant affect the accuracy of template-guided implantation? A prospective clinical study. International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 7(1), 42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-021-00320-3.
Smitkarn, P., Subbalekha, K., Mattheos, N., & Pimkhaokham, A. (2019). The accuracy of single-tooth implants placed using fully digital-guided surgery and freehand implant surgery. Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 46(9), 949-957. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13160
Tahmaseb, A., Wu, V., Wismeijer, D., Coucke, W., & Evans, C. (2018). The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 29(Suppl 16), 416-435. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13346
von Arx, T., Hanni, A., Sendi, P., Buser, D., & Bornstein, M. M. (2011). Radiographic study of the mandibular retromolar canal: an anatomic structure with clinical importance. Journal of Endodontics, 37(12), 1630-1635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.09.007
Wismeijer, D., Joda, T., Flügge, T., Fokas, G., Tahmaseb, A., Bechelli, D., Bohner, L., Bornstein, M., Burgoyne, A., Caram, S., Carmichael, R., Chen, C.-Y., Coucke, W., Derksen, W., Donos, N., El Kholy, K., Evans, C., Fehmer, V., Fickl, S., … Wu, V. (2018). Group 5 ITI Consensus Report: Digital technologies. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 29(Suppl 16), 436-442. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13309
Yeung, M., Abdulmajeed, A., Carrico, C. K., Deeb, G. R., & Bencharit, S. (2020). Accuracy and precision of 3D-printed implant surgical guides with different implant systems: An in vitro study. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 123(6), 821-828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.05.027