Guidance means accuracy: A randomized clinical trial on freehand versus guided dental implantation

Comparison of the accuracy of implant placement using different drilling systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery: A simulation-based experimental study

BACKGROUND

Different designs of surgical drilling systems have been developed for the purpose of static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery (sCAIS), but there is at present little understanding of how design principles affect the accuracy of implant placement.

PURPOSE

The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of implant placement among five drilling systems of sCAIS in a controlled experimental setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five 3D printed models with two edentulous bilateral premolar spaces were allocated to five different drilling systems: group A: sleeve-in-sleeve, group B: sleeve-in-sleeve with self-locking, group C: mounted sleeve-on-drill, group D: integrated sleeve-on-drill with metal sleeve in the guide, group E: integrated sleeve-on-drill without metal sleeve. Models were scanned with CBCT and optical scanner. All implants were digitally planned and 10 implants placed with sCAIS in each group. Postoperative 3D deviation of placed vs planned position was measured by means of platform, apex and angular deviation. Data was analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test (P ≤ .05). Pairwise comparisons were tested with Dunn's test with adjusted P values.

RESULTS

The overall platform deviation ranged from 0.42 ± 0.12 mm (group B) to 1.18 ± 0.19 mm (group C). The overall apex deviation ranged from 0.76 ± 0.22 mm (group B) to 1.95 ± 0.48 mm (group D). The overall angular deviation ranged from 2.50 ± 0.89 degree (group B) to 5.30 ± 1.04 degree (group E). Group A and B showed significantly less angular deviation than groups D and E (P < .05). There was no statistically significant differences in all parameters between group A and B, as well as between group D and E (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant differences were found with regards to accuracy among the five sCAIS systems tested, suggesting that the drilling protocol, the devices used and the design principles of the guides could influence the accuracy of implant placement.

Computer-assisted surgery in medical and dental applications

INTRODUCTION

Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) is a broad surgical methodology that utilizes computer technology to both plan and execute surgical intervention. CAS is widespread in both medicine and dentistry as it allows for minimally invasive and precise surgical procedures. Key innovations in volumetric imaging, virtual surgical planning software, instrument tracking, and robotics have assisted in facilitating the transfer of surgical plans to precise execution of surgical procedures. CAS has long been used in certain medical specialties including neurosurgery, cardiology, orthopedic surgery, otolaryngology, and interventional radiology, and has since expanded to oral and maxillofacial application, particularly for computer-assisted implant surgery.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides an updated overview of the most current research for CAS in medicine and dentistry, with a focus on neurosurgery and dental implant surgery. The MEDLINE electronic database was searched and relevant original and review articles from 2005 to 2020 were included.

EXPERT OPINION

Recent literature suggests that CAS performs favorably in both neurosurgical and dental implant applications. Computer-guided surgical navigation is well entrenched as standard of care in neurosurgery. Whereas static computer-assisted implant surgery has become established in dentistry, dynamic computer-assisted navigation is newly poised to trend upward in dental implant surgery.

Fully versus conventionally guided implant placement by dental students: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare fully guided with conventionally guided implant surgery performed by dental students in terms of deviation of actual implant position from an ideal implant position.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five patients in need of 26 straightforward implant-supported single crowns were randomly allocated to a fully guided (FG, n = 14) or a conventionally guided (CG, n = 12) implant surgery. In the preoperative CBCTs, 3 experienced investigators placed a virtual implant in the ideal position, twice, allowing deviational analysis in the facio-lingual (coronal) and mesio-distal (sagittal) planes for 7 parameters. Facio-lingual crestal deviation, facio-lingual apical deviation, facio-lingual angular deviation, mesio-distal crestal deviation, mesio-distal apical deviation, mesio-distal angular deviation, and vertical deviation between the ideal, virtually placed position and actual implant position for the FG and CG groups were compared statistically (p < .05).

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences between ideal and actual implant position were only seen for the facio-lingual apical deviation (p = .047) and for the facio-lingual angular deviation (p = .019), where the CG group deviated more from the ideal position than the FG group. The 5 other examined variables did not show any significant differences, and none of the implants in the FG group and CG group were placed in conflict with the clinical guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study reported no difference in 5 out of 7 deviational parameters concerning actual implant position in relation to ideal implant position between a FG and CG implant placement protocol performed by dental students. Facio-lingual angular deviation and apical deviation were lower, when a FG protocol was followed. All implants were positioned according to clinical guidelines.

Factors Influencing the Accuracy of Freehand Implant Placement: A Prospective Clinical Study

(1) Background: The objective of implant prosthetic restoration is to ensure the best possible rehabilitation of function and esthetics. Optimal positioning of the implant with regard to the bone availability, surrounding soft tissue, and prosthetic sustainability should be strived for during implant placement. The factors influencing freehand implant placement and the accuracy achieved with this procedure are investigated in this prospective clinical study. (2) Methods: Implants were placed in the single-tooth edentulous sites of the premolar and molar areas in 52 patients. Three-dimensional (3D)-planning was performed virtually prior to the freehand implant operation, and the desired position of the implant was provided to the surgeon. (3) Results: The deviations between the planned and the actually achieved position with freehand implant placement showed the following mean values and standard deviations: angle 8.7 ± 4.8°, 3D deviation at the implant shoulder 1.62 ± 0.87 mm, mesiodistal deviation 0.87 ± 0.75 mm, buccolingual deviation 0.70 ± 0.66 mm, and apiocoronal deviation 0.95 ± 0.61 mm. The type of jaw had a significant influence on accuracy. Major deviations were observed in the lower jaw. Furthermore, the timing of implant placement influenced the mesiodistal deviation and angular deviation; (4) Conclusions: Freehand implant placement demonstrated a higher level of deviation between the planned and actually achieved implant positions. In particular, the ranges showed a large spread. From a prosthetic point of view, there may be complications during the restoration of the prosthetic crown if the implant exit point is not optimally located or if the implants show a high angular deviation.

Comparison between CBCT superimposition protocol and S.T.A.P. method to evaluate the accuracy in implant insertion in guided surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of implant placement using static guided surgery. Two methods of measuring accuracy were compared, the superimposition of CBCT and the non-radiological S.T.A.P. method.

METHODS

In this prospective clinical study 23 implants were placed with static surgical template using a flapless technique and post-extractive procedure. Six months after surgery, a post-operative CBCT was performed to assess the position of the implants and at the same time dental impressions were taken for the final prosthesis. The plaster models made at this stage have made it possible to obtain the position of the implants inserted using the probe technology. Pre-operative and post-operative data were superimposed, deviations in the three dimensions of the space were calculated. The differences between the two measurement methods were assessed.

RESULTS

The study showed no statistically significant differences between the two methods of measuring accuracy at the implant platform level, apex or angles. The average real deviation detected at the implant platform level is 1.16±0.58 mm with CBCT, 1.22±0.55 mm with the S.T.A.P. method; at the apex level is 1.48±0.98 mm with CBCT, 1.47±0.72 mm with the S.T.A.P. method. The average difference between CBCT and S.T.A.P. method for real deviation is 0.06±0.75 mm at the platform level and 0.007±1.24 mm at the apex level.

CONCLUSIONS

The study shows that measuring accuracy by S.T.A.P. method is comparable to that obtained by CBCT superimposition.

Does the macro design of an implant affect the accuracy of template-guided implantation? A prospective clinical study

Background

An implant prosthesis aims to ensure the best possible rehabilitation of function and esthetics following tooth loss. Template-guided insertion is used to achieve an optimal position of the implant with regard to prosthetic restorability, bone availability, and condition of the surrounding soft tissues. The accuracy of template-guided implant placement is subject to various influencing factors.

The clinically achievable accuracy depending on the macro design of the implant body was investigated in this prospective clinical study.

Material and methods

In this prospective clinical study, 20 implants were placed in 20 patients. The implant had a pronounced conical outer geometry (Conelog ProgressiveLine, Camlog Wimsheim, Germany). Data from a study using an implant with a distinct cylindrical outer geometry were used as a comparison group (Conelog ScrewLine, Camlog, Wimsheim, Germany). The clinically achieved implant position was compared with the planned position.

Results

The evaluation of the two-dimensional deviations in direction resulted in the following mean values (standard deviation) at the shoulder: 0.42 mm (0.33) in the buccolingual direction, 0.27 mm (0.25) in the mesiodistal direction, and 0.68 mm (0.55) in the apicocoronal direction. The mean angular deviation was 4.1° (2.3). The three-dimensional (3D) deviation was 0.94 mm (0.53) at the shoulder and 1.36 mm (0.62) at the apex of the implant.

Significant differences between implants with different macro designs were found in the apicocoronal direction. In connection to this, a significant 3D deviation was found at the implant shoulder.

Conclusions

Significant differences in height were found between the groups. The study had shown that the macro design of an implant has no influence on accuracy in all other directions. Overall, the implants showed a high level of accuracy and a low variation in values. The values were in the range determined by the template-guided insertion system in numerous other investigations. This provides good predictability of prosthetic rehabilitation.

Trial registration

German Register for Clinical Studies (DRKS-ID: DRKS000018939). Date of registration: November 11, 2019.

Multivariate analysis of causal factors influencing accuracy of guided implant surgery for partial edentulism: a retrospective clinical study

Abstract

Background

In dental implant treatment, the placement position of the implant body is important. The hypothesis is that there are factors that have a greater impact than the factors that have been studied so far.

Material and Methods

The deviation between planned and actually placed implants was measured three-dimensionally by modified treatment evaluation method in 110 patients who underwent implant placement with guided surgery for partial edentulism. Ten factors that seemed to affect errors in placement were selected: the type of tooth, type of edentulism, distance from the remaining teeth, the type of implant, implant length, number of implants, method of guidance, the number of teeth supporting the surgical guide, number of anchor pins, and presence or absence of a reinforcement structure. The effect of each factor that corrected each confounding was calculated using multivariate analysis.

Results

In this study, 188 implant bodies were set to target, and the errors measurement data of the implant position were as follows: average Angle, 2.5 ± 1.6° (95% CI 2.25–2.69); Base, 0.67 ± 0.37 mm (95% CI 0.62–0.72); and Apex, 0.92 ± 0.47 mm (95% CI 0.86–0.98). As the result of multivariate analysis, larger errors were present in the partially guided group than the fully guided group. The number of teeth supporting the surgical guide significantly influenced the error in placement position. The error caused by the number of anchor pins was significantly different for the Angle. Similarly, the presence of the reinforcement structure influenced the error significantly for the Angle.

Conclusions

It was suggested that the smaller errors could be present by performing guided surgery with full guidance and devising the design of the guide such as the number of teeth supporting the surgical guide, the setting of the anchor pin, and the reinforcement structure.

Accuracy of guided biopsy of the jawbone in a clinical setting: A retrospective analysis

The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of a previously described technique for guided biopsy of osseous pathologies of the jawbone in a clinical setting. The data sets of patients who had undergone guided biopsy procedures were retrospectively examined for accuracy. Digital planning of the biopsies and manufacturing of the tooth-supported drilling template were performed with superimposed cone beam computed tomography and intraoral scans using implant planning software. After a trephine biopsy was taken using the template, the postoperative low-dose cone beam computed tomography was analyzed for accuracy using the planning software with the corresponding (digitally-planned) biopsy cylinder. The mean angular deviation was 4.35 ± 2.5°. The mean depth deviation was -1.40 ± 1.41 mm. Guided biopsy seems to be an alternative to a conventional approach for minimally invasive and highly accurate jawbone biopsy.

Accuracy, Labor-Time and Patient-Reported Outcomes with Partially versus Fully Digital Workflow for Flapless Guided Dental Implants Insertion-A Randomized Clinical Trial with One-Year Follow-Up

(1) Background: Prosthetically-driven implant positioning is a prerequisite for long-term successful treatment. Transferring the planned implant position information to the clinical setting could be done using either static or dynamic guided techniques. The 3D model of the bone and surrounding structures is obtained via cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and the patient's oral condition can be acquired conventionally and then digitalized using a desktop scanner, partially digital workflow (PDW) or digitally with the aid of an intraoral scanner (FDW). The aim of the present randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to compare the accuracy of flapless dental implants insertion in partially edentulous patients with a static surgical template obtained through PDW and FDW. Patient outcome and time spent from data collection to template manufacturing were also compared. (2) Methods: 66 partially edentulous sites (at 49 patients) were randomly assigned to a PDW or FDW for guided implant insertion. Planned and placed implants position were compared by assessing four deviation parameters: 3D error at the entry point, 3D error at the apex, angular deviation, and vertical deviation at entry point. (3) Results: A total of 111 implants were inserted. No implant loss during osseointegration or mechanical and technical complications occurred during the first-year post-implants loading. The mean error at the entry point was 0.44 mm (FDW) and 0.85 (PDW), p ≤ 0.00; at implant apex, 1.03 (FDW) and 1.48 (PDW), p ≤ 0.00; the mean angular deviation, 2.12° (FDW) and 2.48° (PDW), p = 0.03 and the mean depth deviation, 0.45 mm (FDW) and 0.68 mm (PDW), p ≤ 0.00; (4) Conclusions: Despite the statistically significant differences between the groups, and in the limits of the present study, full digital workflow as well as partially digital workflow are predictable methods for accurate prosthetically driven guided implants insertion.

Accuracy evaluation of partially guided and fully guided templates applied to implant surgery of anterior teeth: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To study the accuracy of partially guided and fully guided templates applied to implant surgery of anterior teeth.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty patients who were scheduled to receive dental implant treatment in the anterior region were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of the following study groups (n = 20 each): routine implant-supported restoration treatment (control group, 30 implants), implant-supported restoration treatment using a partially guided template (test group 1, 36 implants), and implant-supported restoration treatment using a fully guided template (test group 2, 33 implants). The depth of implant was controlled for fully guided template. After implantation, planned implants and placed implants were superimposed using digital software, and the deviations (angular, coronal, apical, depth) were analyzed. Esthetic parameters were assessed at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year after the final restoration. Pink esthetic score (PES) and white esthetic score (WES) were respectively used to evaluate the soft tissue and restoration esthetic outcome. Each parameter of PES and WES is assessed with a 0-1-2 score with 2 being the best and 0 being the worst score.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in all of the deviation parameters between the control group, test group 1, and test group 2 (p < 0.001). Mean angular, coronal, apical and depth deviations were all the highest in the control group (6.61 ± 1.09°, 1.05 ± 0.17 mm, 1.36 ± 0.13 mm, and 1.02 ± 0.13 mm, respectively), and lowest in test group 2 (2.05 ± 0.45°, 0.39 ± 0.12 mm, 0.28 ± 0.09 mm, and 0.24 ± 0.06 mm, respectively). At 1 year after the final restoration, the analysis revealed mean PES values of 7.09 ± 0.56 (control group), 8.39 ± 0.54 (test group 1), and 9.04 ± 0.35 (test group 2). The WES values were 7.24 ± 0.54 (control group), 8.47 ± 0.44 (test group 1), and 8.97 ± 0.38 (test group 2). At all examinations, the mean PES and WES values were both the highest in test group 2 and lowest in the control group. The PES and WES values recorded in the control group at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year after final restoration were significantly lower than those in test groups (p < 0.001). Moreover, the PES and WES values recorded in the test group 1 at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year after final restoration were significantly lower than those in test group 2 (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Digital surgical guides can improve the accuracy of the three-dimensional position of implants in the maxillary esthetic zone, the fully guided template has higher precision than that of the partially guided template, and plays an important role in obtaining the ideal esthetic outcome for maxillary anterior teeth.

In Vitro Comparison between Metal Sleeve-Free and Metal Sleeve-Incorporated 3D-Printed Computer-Assisted Implant Surgical Guides

The present study aims to compare the accuracy of metal sleeve-free 3D-printed computer-assisted implant surgical guides (MSF group) (n = 10) with metal sleeve-incorporated 3D-printed computer-assisted implant surgical guides (MSI group) (n = 10). Implants of diameter 4.0 mm and 5.0 mm were placed in the left second premolars and bilateral first molars, respectively, using a fully guided system. Closed-form sleeves were used in teeth on the left and open-form sleeves on the right. The weight differences of the surgical guides before and after implant placement, and angular deviations before and after implant placement were measured. Weight differences were compared with Student's t-tests and angular deviations with Mann-Whitney tests. Cross-sectional views of the insert parts were observed with a scanning electron microscope. Preoperative and postoperative weight differences between the two groups were not statistically significant (p = 0.821). In terms of angular deviations, those along the mesiodistal direction for the left second premolars were significantly lower in the MSF group (p = 0.006). However, those along the mesiodistal direction for the bilateral molars and those along the buccolingual direction for all teeth were not significantly different (p > 0.05). 3D-printed implant surgical guides without metal sleeve inserts enable accurate implant placement without exhausting the guide holes, rendering them feasible for fully guided implant placement.

The accuracy of implant placement with computer-guided surgery in partially edentulous patients and possible influencing factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To review the current clinical studies regarding the accuracy of implant computer-guided surgery in partially edentulous patients and investigate potential influencing factors.

STUDY SELECTION

Electronic searches on the PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, and subsequent manual searches were performed. Two reviewers selected the studies following our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Qualitative review and meta-analysis of the implant placement accuracy were performed to analyze potential influencing factors. Angular deviation, coronal deviation, apical deviation, and depth deviation were evaluated as the accuracy outcomes.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included in this systematic review, including six randomized controlled trials, nine prospective studies, and three retrospective clinical studies. A total of 1317 implants placed in 642 partially edentulous patients were reviewed. Eight studies were evaluated using meta-analysis. Fully guided surgery showed statistically higher accuracy in angular (P <0.001), coronal (P <0.001), and apical deviation (P <0.05) compared with pilot-drill guided surgery. A statistically significant difference (P <0.001) was also observed in coronal deviation between the bounded edentulous (BES) and distal extension spaces (DES). A significantly lower angular deviation (P <0.001) was found in implants placed using computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) compared to the conventional surgical guides.

CONCLUSIONS

The edentulous space type, surgical guide manufacturing procedure, and guided surgery protocol can influence the accuracy of computer-guided surgery in partially edentulous patients. Higher accuracy was found when the implants were placed in BES, with CAD/CAM manufactured surgical guides, using a fully guided surgery protocol.

Use of a digitally guided triple technique for bone reduction, implant placement, and immediate interim prostheses in complete-arch implant surgery

A digitally guided triple technique for bone reduction, implant placement, and immediate interim prostheses in complete-arch implant surgery is presented. This technique integrates bone reduction and implant placement information into a dual-function surgical template and introduces a digital approach to fabricating immediate interim implant-supported fixed dental prostheses with the same occlusal relationship as the one evaluated with diagnostic removable prostheses.

The Influence of Surgical Experience and Bone Density on the Accuracy of Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery in Edentulous Jaws Using a Mucosa-Supported Surgical Template with a Half-Guided Implant Placement Protocol-A Randomized Clinical Study

The aim of our randomized clinical study was to analyze the influence of surgical experience and bone density on the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS) in edentulous jaws using a mucosa-supported surgical template with a half-guided implant placement protocol. Altogether, 40 dental implants were placed in the edentulous jaws of 13 patients (novice surgeons: 18 implants, 6 patients (4 male), age 71 ± 10.1 years; experienced surgeons: 22 implants, 7 patients (4 male), age 69.2 ± 4.55 years). Angular deviation, coronal and apical global deviation and grey level measurements were calculated for all implants by a blinded investigator using coDiagnostiX software. 3DSlicer software was applied to calculate the bone volume fraction (BV/TV) for each site of implant placement. There were no statistically significant differences between the two study groups in either of the primary outcome variables. There was a statistically significant negative correlation between angular deviation and both grey level measurements (R-value: −0.331, p < 0.05) and BV/TV (R-value: −0.377, p < 0.05). The results of the study suggest that surgical experience did not influence the accuracy of implant placement. The higher the bone density at the sites of implant placement, the higher the accuracy of static CAIS.

The Digital Abutment Check: An Improvement of the Fully Digital Workflow

By using modern digitalization techniques, an existing denture can be digitized and aid the provision of a new implant-supported denture according to a fully digital workflow. This includes fully navigated implant surgery and results in an immediately provided prosthetic restoration. However, even with the current digital workflow, it is challenging to achieve a definitive prosthetic restoration in a single treatment session. In order to achieve a definitive denture in as few treatment sessions as possible, we have implemented the digital abutment test. This test modified the existing data set and determined the final restoration. In the present case, the preexisting maxillary removable complete denture was converted into a fixed immediate restoration using the fully digital workflow. The workflow is divided into two treatment phases, each with three treatment sessions, where part of the second phase involves an innovative digital abutment check. The illustrated case shows an effective use of current digital possibilities. Special attention was also paid to a minimally invasive course of therapy.

An open protocol for evaluating the accuracy of guided implant surgery by using digital casts

An open protocol is described for the evaluation of implant deviation by using digital casts. A digital surgical planning cast and a definitive cast are imported into a reverse engineering software program, and cylinders are created as simplifications of the implants. After superimposing the digital casts, implant deviations can be calculated by using the coordinates of the cylinders. This protocol only requires routine clinical data from the guided implant surgery and digital prosthodontic workflow; it can therefore be easily embedded into the clinical procedure. Any dental software program providing access to implant coordinates can be integrated with this protocol to overcome the shortcomings of various closed-loop workflows used by dental software programs.

Does a fully digital workflow improve the accuracy of computer-assisted implant surgery in partially edentulous patients? A systematic review of clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Accurate implant placement is essential in reducing post-treatment complications and in ensuring a successful treatment outcome.

PURPOSE

To compare the accuracy of fully-guided static computer-assisted implant surgery (s-CAIS) using partially- and fully-digital workflows.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic and manual literature searches were performed to collect evidence concerning the accuracy of fully-guided s-CAIS procedures utilizing tooth-supported guides. Quantitative analysis was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of partially- and fully-digital workflows, and survival rates and complications were qualitatively analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies, including 6 randomized controlled trials and 7 prospective clinical studies, were selected for quantitative and qualitative synthesis. A total of 669 implants in 325 patients using s-CAIS were available for review. Meta-analysis of the accuracy revealed a total mean angular deviation of 2.68° (95% CI: 2.32°-3.03°); mean global coronal deviation of 1.03 mm (95% CI: 0.88-1.18 mm); mean global apical deviation of 1.33 mm (95% CI: 1.17-1.50 mm); and mean depth deviation of 0.59 mm (95% CI: 0.46-0.70 mm). Minimal differences were found between the two different workflows. Few complications were reported, and survival rates were between 97.8% to 100% (range of follow-up: 12 to 24 months) in the available studies.

CONCLUSION

Similar accuracy is obtained when implants are placed in partially edentulous patients using fully-guided s-CAIS, independently of the workflow utilized.

Influence of bone condition on implant placement accuracy with computer-guided surgery

BACKGROUND

The impact of the jaw bone condition, such as bone quantity and quality in the implant placement site, affecting the accuracy of implant placement with computer-guided surgery (CGS) remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the influence of bone condition, i.e., bone density, bone width, and cortical bone thickness at the crestal bone on the accuracy of implant placement with CGS.

METHODS

A total of 47 tissue-level implants from 25 patients placed in the posterior mandibular area were studied. Implant placement position was planned on the simulation software, Simplant® Pro 16, by superimposing preoperative computed tomography images with stereolithography data of diagnostic wax-up on the dental cast. Implant placement surgery was performed using the surgical guide plate to reflect the planned implant position. The post-surgical dental cast was scanned to determine the position of the placed implant. Linear and vertical deviations between planned and placed implants were calculated. Deviations at both platform and apical of the implant were measured in the bucco-lingual and mesio-distal directions. Intra- and inter-observer variabilities were calculated to ensure measurement reliability. Multiple linear regression analysis was employed to investigate the effect of the bone condition, such as density, width, and cortical bone thickness at the implant site area, on the accuracy of implant placement (α = 0.05).

RESULT

Intra- and inter-observer variabilities of these measurements showed excellent agreement (intra class correlation coefficient ± 0.90). Bone condition significantly influenced the accuracy of implant placement using CGS (p < 0.05). Both bone density and width were found to be significant predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Low bone density and/or narrow bucco-lingual width near the alveolar bone crest in the implant placement site might be a risk factor influencing the accuracy of implant placement with CGS.

Static computer-aided, partially guided, and free-handed implant placement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the outcomes of static computer-aided implant placement (sCAIP) compared to partially guided (PGIP) and free-handed (FHIP) implant placement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019131397). A comprehensive literature search was performed by two independent examiners. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected. Treatment modalities included sCAIP, PGIP, and FHIP. Data pertaining to the outcomes of interest were extracted. Random-effects meta-analyses were feasible for a subset of outcomes.

RESULTS

From an initial list of 2,870 records, fourteen articles for a total of ten RCTs were selected. Data from 7 of these studies allowed for the conduction of three meta-analyses comparing accuracy of implant placement across modalities. Survival rate up to 12 months post-loading was high (>98%) and comparable between treatments (low-quality evidence). No tangible differences in terms of patient perception of intra- or postoperative discomfort were observed (low-quality evidence). Quantitative analyses revealed significantly lower angular (MD = 4.41°, 95% CI 3.99-4.83, p < .00001), coronal (MD = 0.65 mm, 95% CI 0.50-0.79, p < .00001), and apical (MD = 1.13 mm, 95% CI 0.92-1.34, p < .00001) deviation values for sCAIP as compared to FHIP (8 studies, 383 patients, 878 implants, high-quality evidence). A similar discrepancy, in favor of sCAIP, was observed for angular deviation only as compared to PGIP (MD = 2.11°, 95% CI 1.06-3.16, p < .00001).

CONCLUSIONS

sCAIP is associated with superior accuracy compared to PGIP and FHIP.

Digitally planned root end surgery with static guide and custom trephine burs: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Apicoectomy is an endodontic surgical intervention that requires high precision. The computer-assisted static guided approach has proven to increase the precision of dental implantation in a significant manner. The authors sought to transfer this precision to root-end resection with the use of custom designed trephine burs manufactured specifically for use in targeted endodontic microsurgery.

METHODS

A set of custom bone trephines were designed and manufactured, then their digital models were integrated into an already existing implant surgical planning software, in cooperation with the software developer. Apicoectomy was performed in an actual case with the help of the new system.

RESULTS

It has become possible to plan root end removal in the virtual space and to manufacture 3D printed static surgical guides to help the execution of the surgery. A patient with persistent periapical lesion was successfully treated without complication. The 6-month follow-up found uneventful healing.

CONCLUSION

The presented system is a step toward a standardized digital system and workflow dedicated to guided endodontic surgery.