Dataset Information

A Retrospective Study on the Transferring Accuracy of a Fully Guided Digital Template in the Anterior Zone.

ABSTRACT: The accuracy of implant placement with a fully guided digital template can be influenced by many factors, such as arch difference, alveolar bone density, timing of implant placement and open flap. The purpose of this article was to evaluate the factors presumptively affecting the accuracy of implant placement assisted by the fully guided template in the anterior zone. In 40 patients with missing anterior teeth, a total of 52 implants were placed with tooth-borne, fully guided templates after CBCT evaluation, in West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University. After overlapping the pre-and post-operative DICOM data, measurements were taken in the dental implant planning software (Nobel Clinician^®) to calculate linear and angular deviations between virtual placement plan and actual implant placement. Grouping was categorized according to three factors that possibly have an influence on accuracy: arch type (maxilla/mandible), timing of implant placement (immediate/delayed), surgical technique (open flap/flapless). The data was analyzed with independent sample t-test (p < 0.05). The results showed that the apical, coronal, depth and angular mean deviations of implant positions in anterior zone were 1.13 ± 0.39 mm, 0.86 ± 0.33 mm, 0.41 ± 0.66 mm, 3.32 ± 1.65° with the fully guided templates. The accuracy at apex level, coronal level and the angulation were similar between the maxilla and mandible, and the magnitude of all four deviations between immediate and delayed implantation, open flap and flapless technique were small. No statistically significant difference was observed (p > 0.05). Whereas there was significant difference in depth deviation between maxilla and mandible (p < 0.05). Conclusively, the implant site, alveolar bone density, timing of implant placement and surgical techniques merely compromise the implant placement accuracy under the assistance of a fully guided template.

SUBMITTER: Huang L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8399113 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:One of the challenges encountered by clinicians new to implant dentistry is the determination and controlling of implant location. This study compared the accuracy of fully guided (FG) and pilot-guided (PG) static computer-assisted implant placement (sCAIP) protocols against the conventional freehand (FH) protocol for placing single anterior and posterior implants by recently introduced clinicians to implant dentistry. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Ten clinicians new to implant dentistry inserted one anterior (central incisor) and one posterior (first molar) implants per protocol in training maxillary models. The FG protocol involved drilling and implant placement through the guide, while the PG protocol controlled the pilot drilling only. The FH implant placement was completed without the aid of any guide. A total of 30 models were used, and 60 implants were inserted. The implant vertical, horizontal neck, horizontal apex, and angle deviations from planned positions were calculated. RESULTS:The FG protocol provided the most accurate implant placement in relation to horizontal neck (0.47 mm-0.52 mm), horizontal apex (0.71 mm-0.74 mm), and angle deviations (2.42o-2.61o). The vertical deviation was not significantly different among the different protocols. The PG protocol was generally similar to the FH protocol with a horizontal neck deviation of 1.01 mm-1.14 mm, horizontal apex deviation of 1.02 mm-1.35 mm, and angle deviation of 4.65o-7.79o. The FG protocol showed similarity in the accuracy of the anterior and posterior implants. There was a tendency for inferior accuracy for posterior implants compared with anterior implants for the PG and FH protocols. CONCLUSIONS:In the hands of recently introduced clinicians to implant dentistry, it appears that the accuracy of the FG protocol was superior to the other protocols and was not influenced by the position of the implants. The PG and FH protocols showed inferior accuracy for posterior implants compared with anterior implants.

Dataset Information

A Retrospective Study on the Transferring Accuracy of a Fully Guided Digital Template in the Anterior Zone.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets