EVALUATING THE ACCURACY OF TOOTH-SUPPORTED VS MUCOSA-SUPPORTED 3D-PRINTED SURGICAL GUIDE IN DENTAL IMPLANT PLACEMENT (CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY)
Abstract
Objectives: This study aims to estimate the accuracy of implant insertion using stereolithographic 3D-printed surgical guides; two types were evaluated: tooth-supported and mucosa-supported guides.
Materials and methods: 9 patients were enrolled in this study, 5 males and 4 females, mean age: 49.33 years. 12 implants were inserted using tooth-supported guides While 12 implants were inserted using mucosa-supported guides, deviations between the virtual planned implants and the placed implants were calculated after matching the pre- and post-operative CBCT. Matching process was performed using digital software (Blue Sky Plan); angular deviation, deviation at the entry point and apex of the implant were measured. An independent samples t-test was performed to compare the two groups using SPSS version 25.
Results: The mean angular deviations were 3.67 ± 1.61 degrees and 5.46 ± 2.41 degrees with the tooth-supported and mucosa-supported surgical guides respectively, and the mean three‐dimensional deviations were 0.70 ± 0.35 mm and 1.38 ± 0.41 mm at the entry point, 0.99 ± 0.52 mm and 1.86 ± 0.51 mm at the apex, with the tooth-supported and mucosa-supported surgical guides respectively.
Conclusions: The results of this study showed that the accuracy of the tooth-supported guide is superior to the mucosa-supported guide.
Keywords
Supporting Institution
Project Number
Thanks
References
- 1. Hämmerle, C.H., R.E. Jung, and A. Feloutzis, A systematic review of the survival of implants in bone sites augmented with barrier membranes (guided bone regeneration) in partially edentulous patients. Journal of clinical periodontology, 2002. 29: p. 226-231.
- 2. Naziri, E., A. Schramm, and F. Wilde, Accuracy of computer-assisted implant placement with insertion templates. GMS Interdisciplinary plastic and reconstructive surgery DGPW, 2016. 5.
- 3. Yeo, D.K.L., T. Freer, and P. Brockhurst, Distortions in panoramic radiographs. Australian orthodontic journal, 2002. 18(2): p. 92.
- 4. Reddy, M., et al., A comparison of the diagnostic advantages of panoramic radiography and computed tomography scanning for placement of root form dental implants. Clinical oral implants research, 1994. 5(4): p. 229-238.
- 5. Skjerven, H., et al., In Vivo Accuracy of Implant Placement Using a Full Digital Planning Modality and Stereolithographic Guides. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 2019. 34(1).
- 6. Arısan, V., Z.C. Karabuda, and T. Özdemir, Accuracy of two stereolithographic guide systems for computer‐aided implant placement: a computed tomography‐based clinical comparative study. Journal of periodontology, 2010. 81(1): p. 43-51.
- 7. Campelo, L.D. and J.R.D. Camara, Flapless implant surgery: a 10-year clinical retrospective analysis. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 2002. 17(2).
- 8. Brodala, N., Flapless surgery and its effect on dental implant outcomes. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, 2009. 24: p. 118.
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Health Care Administration
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Bassel Brad
0000-0002-2428-5499
Syria
Mohammad Alaa Alzein
0000-0003-1125-9969
Syria
Mohammed Yamen Al-shurbaji Al-moziek
0000-0001-9669-2643
Türkiye
Publication Date
October 5, 2020
Submission Date
February 26, 2020
Acceptance Date
May 7, 2020
Published in Issue
Year 2020 Volume: 23 Number: 3