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

Accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery (S-CAIS) using CAD-CAM surgical templates fabricated from different additive manufacturing technologies

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Different 3D printers are available for guided implant surgery, but studies that evaluate their source of errors and their cost-effectiveness are lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of different 3-dimensional (3D) printed surgical templates made using different additive manufacturing technologies and to evaluate the effect of implant location on the accuracy of fully guided implant placement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifty partially edentulous maxillary typodonts with edentulous sites in the right second premolar (SP), right lateral incisor (LI), left central incisor (CI), and left first molar (FM) locations were scanned and printed from the standard tessellation language (STL) datasets. The study compared 5 groups for the fabrication of implant surgical templates: Varseo S-Bego (Bego), Polyjet-Stratasys (Poly), Low Force Stereolithography-FormLabs (LFS), P30+-Straumann (P30), and M2-Carbon (M2). After fully guided implant placement, the typodont was scanned, and the 3D implant positions were compared with the master model by superimposing the STL files. Descriptive statistics were calculated for groups and subgroups, and comparisons among the groups and subgroups were conducted via 2-way mixed analysis of variance, Tukey honest significant difference, and post hoc Bonferroni tests (α=.05).

RESULTS

The results were site specific and not consistent within each group. For angle deviation, the within-group analysis for P30 demonstrated significantly lower values for implants positioned at site SP (1.4 ±0.8 degrees) than for sites LI (2.3 ±0.7 degrees; P=.001) and CI (2.3 ±0.8 degrees; P=.007). For 3D offset at base for implant CI, LFS was significantly higher than Bego (P=.002), Poly (P=.035), or M2 (P=.001); P30 was also significantly higher than Bego (P=.014) and M2 (P=.006). LFS had a significantly higher 3D offset at the tip than Bego (P=.001) and M2 (P=.022) for implant CI.

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of 3D printer seemed to influence fully guided implant surgery in terms of the final implant position compared with initial implant planning. However, although statistically significant differences were present across groups, all additive manufacturing technologies were within clinically acceptable values.

Positional accuracy during the sequence of static computer-assisted implant surgery in three alveolar ridge morphologies: An in vitro study

PURPOSE

This in vitro study aimed to assess the positional accuracy during the sequence of static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) according to the anatomical characteristics of the alveolar ridge.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Maxillary bone models with six single tooth gaps including clinical scenarios of healed alveolar ridge (HR), single-rooted (SRS), and three-rooted socket (TRS) morphologies were used in this study. Positional deviations during implant placement procedures were evaluated after the pilot osteotomy (PD), final osteotomy (FD), and implant placement with respect to the pre-planned implant position by using a software package. ANOVA and post hoc analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 90 implants were included in this study. Higher mean angular, crestal, and apical deviations were found after the PD and FD (3.5 ± 2.4°, 0.7 ± 0.3 mm, and 1.4 ± 0.8 mm versus 3.6 ±2.2°, 0.6 ± 0.3 mm, and 1.2 ± 0.6 mm) compared to IP (2.8 ± 1.6°, 0.7 ± 0.3 mm, and 1.2 ± 0.5 mm, p ≤ 0.004). Implants placed in TRS demonstrated higher mean angular, crestal, and apical deviations (4.0 ± 1.7°, 0.8 ± 0.3 mm, and 1.6 ± 0.5 mm) compared to implants placed in SRS (2.5 ± 1.2°, 0.7 ± 0.3 mm, and 1.1 ± 0.4 mm) or HR (2.0 ± 0.9°, 0.5 ± 0.3 mm, and 0.8 ± 0.4 mm, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Positional deviations during sCAIS procedures are initiated with the first implant osteotomy and persist throughout the drilling sequence. However, deviations slightly decreased after implant placement. The alveolar ridge morphology is strongly associated with positional deviations. Higher deviations were observed in three-rooted and single-rooted sockets simulating an immediate approach compared to healed sites simulating a delayed protocol.

Influence of clinical expertise and practical experience on transfer accuracy in guided dental implant placement - an in vitro study

PURPOSE

To investigate whether inexperienced users applying a static navigation system can perform in-vitro a fully guided implant placement protocol and achieve similar results in terms of accuracy compared to experienced clinicians.

METHODS

Based on 36 identical resin models, a computer-assisted implant planning was performed and a surgical guide was produced accordingly. Three study groups were composed with 12 operators, each: control group with experienced surgeons (DOC), test group 1 with dental technicians (TEC) and test group 2 with non-specialists (OFC). Using a fully guided drilling protocol, two implants were placed into each of the 36 models. Subsequently, the differences between the virtually planned and final implant positions were determined and the transfer accuracy was evaluated.

RESULTS

For the control group DOC, the mean value of axial deviation was 1.90 ± 1.15 degrees, for 3-dimensional deviation at the implant base 0.52 ± 0.33 mm, for 3-dimensional deviation at the implant tip 0.76 ± 0.39 mm and for vertical deviation at the implant tip - 0.11 ± 0.51 mm. For corresponding parameters, the mean values of test group TEC were 1.99 ± 0.87 degrees, 0.42 ± 0.21 mm, 0.68 ± 0.30 mm and - 0.03 ± 0.33 mm and for test group OFC 2.29 ± 1.17 degrees, 0.63 ± 0.35 mm, 0.89 ± 0.43 mm and - 0.24 ± 0.57 mm, respectively. The results did not reveal any statistically significant differences between the control and the 2 test groups (p˃0.05).

CONCLUSION

The results of the present in-vitro study demonstrated that inexperienced users applying a static navigation system can perform a fully guided implant placement protocol and achieve similar results in terms of accuracy compared to experienced clinicians in this specific in vitro setup.

3D virtual patient-Magnetically retained printed stackable system for implant guided placement: Case report

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this report is to present the complete workflow of 3D virtual patient for planning and performing implant surgery with magnetically retained 3D-printed stackable guides.

CLINICAL CONSIDERATIONS

A 3D-printed stackable system was proposed based on bone, dental, and facial references. Initially, a 66-year-old male patient was digitalized through photographs, cone beam computed tomography, and intraoral scans (Virtuo Vivo, Straumann). All files were merged to create a 3D virtual patient in the planning software (coDiagnostiX, Straumann). Sequential stackable guides were designed, printed, and cured. Magnets were inserted into connectors, and the interim protheses received color characterization. Four mounted guides were produced for the specific purposes of pin fixation, bone reduction, implant placement, and immediate provisionalization. After surgery and healing period, patient digital data were updated. Final implant positions were compared to planned values and inconsistencies were clinically acceptable. The mean angular deviation was 5.4° (3.2-7.3) and mean 3D discrepancies were of 0.90 mm (0.46-1.12) at the entry point and 1.68 mm (1.00-2.20) at implant apex. Case follow-up revealed stability, patient's comfort, and no intercurrences.

CONCLUSION

Magnetically retained stackable guides provide treatment accuracy and reduce surgical and prosthetic complications. The projected virtual patient enhances decision-making and communication between the multidisciplinary team and the patient, while decreases time and costs.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Bidimensional diagnosis and freehand implant placement have limitations and outcomes often rely on professionals' expertise. Performing facially driven virtual planning improves treatment predictability. This approach promotes function, esthetic harmony, and patient satisfaction. Implant guided surgery and 3D printed prostheses constitute a reproducible digital workflow that can be implemented into clinical practice to optimize dental care.

Accuracy of dental implant placement with CAD-CAM 3D printed and conventional thermoplastic surgical pilot guides: A clinical comparative trial

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Dental implant placement is routinely guided by using 2-dimensional radiographs and thermoplastic surgical guides (CTGs), which may lack accuracy. Three-dimensionally (3D) printed surgical guides (3DGs) have been recommended to improve accuracy. However, they require additional training on specific technology. The current knowledge on indications for CTGs and 3DGs is limited.

PURPOSE

The purposes of this clinical comparative trial were to compare the accuracy of implant placement using a CTG or 3DG pilot surgical guide (3DGp) and to evaluate clinical outcomes related to the surgical procedure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients planned for a single implant were recruited and assigned to either the CTG or 3DGp group. The ideal implant position was determined through virtual treatment planning using intraoral digital scans and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Deviations were determined by superimposing the postsurgical digital scans and the virtually planned implant position. The Mann Whitney U Test was performed for each measure (α=.05). A linear regression model was performed to estimate and control for the effect of covariables.

RESULTS

Twenty participants were recruited (10 CTG and 10 3DGp). Mean initial ISQ values were 69 ±13 and 76 ±8 for the CTG and 3DGp group, respectively. There was no significant difference in primary (P=.15) or secondary (P=.383) stability between the CTG and 3DGp groups. Data revealed minimal deviations for both groups (P>.05). Bone type (P=.026) and secondary stability (P=.031) had a significant effect on angular deviation.

CONCLUSIONS

CTG accuracy was similar to that of 3DGp. Reduced angular deviation was noted in the presence of softer bone type and higher secondary stability.

Comparative evaluation on wear resistance of metal sleeve, sleeve-free resin, and reinforced sleeve-free resin implant guide: An in vitro study

BACKGROUND

In-office three-dimensional (3D) printers and metal sleeveless surgical guides are becoming a major trend recently. However, metal sleeve-free designs are reported to be more prone to distortion which might lead to variation in the inner diameter of the drill hole and cause deviation and inaccuracy in the placement of the implant. Carbon fiber nanoparticles are reported to improve the properties of 3D printing resin material in industrial application.

AIM

The purpose of the study is to evaluate and compare the wear resistance of 3D-printed implant guides with metal sleeve, sleeve-free, and reinforced sleeve-free resin to the guide drill.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 66 samples with 22 samples in each group. Three groups including 3D-printed surgical guide with metal sleeve (Group A), without metal sleeve (Group B), an carbon fiber reinforced without metal sleeve (Group C) were included in the study. All samples were evaluated before sequential drilling and after sequential drilling using Vision Measuring Machine. The data were tabulated and statistically evaluated.

RESULTS

The data obtained were statistically analyzed with one-way analysis of variance and posthoc test. The data obtained for wear observed in the samples showed that the wear was highest in Group B with a mean of 0.5036 ± 0.1118 and the least was observed in Group A with a mean of 0.0228 ± 0.0154 and Group C was almost similar to Group A with mean of 0.0710 ± 0.0381. The results showed there was a significant difference between Group B with Group A and C, respectively (P < 0.05). The results showed that there was no significant difference regarding the wear observed between Groups A and C (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The wear observed in the guide with a metal sleeve and carbon fiber reinforced without a metal sleeve was almost similar. The carbon fiber-reinforced guide showed better tolerance to guide drill equivalent to metal sleeve. Thus, carbon fiber nanoparticles reinforced in 3D printing resin have shown improved strength and can be used as a good replacement for a metal sleeve for an accurate placement of the implant.

Influence of the macrodesign of an implant and the sleeve system on the accuracy of template-guided implant placement: A prospective clinical study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Three-dimensional (3D) implant planning facilitates determining the optimal position and number of implants, in terms of function and esthetics, by taking into account adjacent structures. Template-guided implant placement is an established procedure for implementing this planning, although the accuracy between the planned and the actual implant position is subject to many influences. The influences of the macrodesign of the implants and the sleeve materials used have rarely been investigated clinically.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this prospective clinical study was to investigate the accuracy of template-guided implant placement according to the macrodesign of different implants and the design of the drill sleeve.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Implants were placed in 60 participants within 3 groups (n=20): tapered implant with a metal sleeve (T-MS), tapered implant with a polymeric sleeve (T-PS), and progressive tapered implant with a polymeric sleeve (XT-PS). After overlaying the 3D implant planning image with the postoperative intraoral scan, deviations were 2-dimensionally related to the implant shoulder (S) and the apex (A) in terms of height (2DHS/2DHA), mesiodistal (2DSmd/2DAmd) and buccolingual (2DSbo/2DAbo), as well as 3-dimensionally on the implant shoulder (3DS), on the apex (3DA), and on the axis deviation (Axis). The groups were compared by using the analysis of variance. The Tukey post hoc test was performed for normally distributed data to identify significant differences among groups (α=.05).

RESULTS

The errors for 2DSmd and 2DSbo were 0.26 to 0.40 mm across all groups. The 3DS group varied between 0.67 and 0.87 mm. No significant differences were found in terms of the material of the sleeves or the macrodesign of the implants (P>.05). Significant differences were found for 2DHS (P=.029) and 2DHA (P=.016) between the groups with the different sleeves. Group T-PS showed the least height deviation.

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of height deviation, significant differences were found among the groups, with deviations depending on the implant type and the sleeve type. Overall, the method showed a high level of accuracy, providing good predictability of the prosthetic rehabilitation.

Effect of pilot-guided implant placement concept on the accuracy of osteotomy preparation and implant placement

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy of osteotomy preparation and implant placement for 3 pilot-guided (PG) concepts, namely, a surgical template with a metal sleeve (MS), a surgical template with an in-built nonmetal sleeve (NMS), and a surgical template with an in-built nonmetal sleeve for round bur indentation (RB).

METHODS

Surgical models with missing maxillary molars were studied. The MS templates were designed to accept metal sleeves, while the NMS and RB templates were designed with in-built nonmetal sleeves. Ten templates were tested per group (n = 10). After each step (pilot drilling, 2nd drilling, 3rd drilling, profiling, and implant placement), the surgical model was scanned and compared against the planning model to determine maximum horizontal deviation (MHD) and maximum angle deviation (MAD).

RESULTS

The MS and NMS templates exhibited a similar increase in MHD with successive drilling steps. The MAD for the pilot drilling step was significantly lower for MS than for the other groups. However, the differences among groups for MHD and MAD diminished in later steps. All templates had an MHD of 1.0 mm or less and an MAD less than 8°.

CONCLUSION

The investigated PG implant placement concepts resulted in similar deviations in the placed implants.

Advancing accuracy in guided implant placement: A comprehensive meta-analysis: Meta-Analysis evaluation of the accuracy of available implant placement Methods

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aimed to determine the accuracy of currently available computer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS) modalities under in vitro conditions and investigate whether these novel techniques can achieve clinically acceptable accuracy.

DATA

In vitro studies comparing the postoperative implant position with the preoperative plan were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool For In Vitro Studies (QUIN Tool) and a sensitivity analysis was conducted using funnel plots.

SOURCES

A systematic search was performed on April 18, 2023, using the following three databases: MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. No filters or restrictions were applied during the search.

RESULTS

A total of 5,894 studies were included following study selection. Robotic- and static CAIS (sCAIS) had the most accurate and clinically acceptable outcomes. sCAIS was further divided according to the guidance level. Among the sCAIS groups, fully guided implant placement had the greatest accuracy. Augmented reality-based CAIS (AR-based CAIS) had clinically acceptable results for all the outcomes except for apical global deviation. Dynamic CAIS (dCAIS) demonstrated clinically safe results, except for horizontal apical deviation. Freehand implant placement was associated with the greatest number of errors.

CONCLUSIONS

Fully guided sCAIS demonstrated the most predictable outcomes, whereas freehand sCAIS demonstrated the lowest accuracy. AR-based and robotic CAIS may be promising alternatives.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of robotic CAIS and investigate the accuracy of various CAIS modalities.

Evaluation of the accuracy of implant placement by using implant positional guide versus freehand: a prospective clinical study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to examine and compare the accuracy of implant placement using implant positional guide and freehand.

METHODS

48 implants were placed in patients with single tooth loss with implant positional guide and freehand, respectively. The accuracy of implant placement was assessed by comparing the actual and planned position, including four parameters: coronal deviation, apical deviation, angular deviation, and vertical deviation.

RESULTS

Comparing all the variables, it has been found that the implant positional guide is more accurate than the freehand. All parameters describing in the deviation were significantly lower in the implant positional guide group than the freehand.

CONCLUSIONS

The implant positional guide can act as a practicable tool for dental implant surgery. It is a promising technology that guarantees low cost and high precision in implant surgery. However, based on the restricted evidence from clinical studies, longer follow-up periods, larger population studies, and standardized experimental studies are required. Trial registration CHICTR, ChiCTR2300071024. Registered 28 April 2023-CHICTR, ChiCTR2300071024. Registered 28 April 2023-Retrospectively registered, https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=195424 .

A novel mixed reality-guided dental implant placement navigation system based on virtual-actual registration

BACKGROUNDS

The key to successful dental implant surgery is to place the implants accurately along the pre-operative planned paths. The application of surgical navigation systems can significantly improve the safety and accuracy of implantation. However, the frequent shift of the views of the surgeon between the surgical site and the computer screen causes troubles, which is expected to be solved by the introduction of mixed-reality technology through the wearing of HoloLens devices by enabling the alignment of the virtual three-dimensional (3D) image with the actual surgical site in the same field of view.

METHODS

This study utilized mixed reality technology to enhance dental implant surgery navigation. Our first step was reconstructing a virtual 3D model from pre-operative cone-beam CT (CBCT) images. We then obtained the relative position between objects using the navigation device and HoloLens camera. Via the algorithms of virtual-actual registration, the transformation matrixes between the HoloLens devices and the navigation tracker were acquired through the HoloLens-tracker registration, and the transformation matrixes between the virtual model and the patient phantom through the image-phantom registration. In addition, the algorithm of surgical drill calibration assisted in acquiring transformation matrixes between the surgical drill and the patient phantom. These algorithms allow real-time tracking of the surgical drill's location and orientation relative to the patient phantom under the navigation device. With the aid of the HoloLens 2, virtual 3D images and actual patient phantoms can be aligned accurately, providing surgeons with a clear visualization of the implant path.

RESULTS

Phantom experiments were conducted using 30 patient phantoms, with a total of 102 dental implants inserted. Comparisons between the actual implant paths and the pre-operatively planned implant paths showed that our system achieved a coronal deviation of 1.507 ± 0.155 mm, an apical deviation of 1.542 ± 0.143 mm, and an angular deviation of 3.468 ± 0.339°. The deviation was not significantly different from that of the navigation-guided dental implant placement but better than the freehand dental implant placement.

CONCLUSION

Our proposed system realizes the integration of the pre-operative planned dental implant paths and the patient phantom, which helps surgeons achieve adequate accuracy in traditional dental implant surgery. Furthermore, this system is expected to be applicable to animal and cadaveric experiments in further studies.

Reliability of a chairside CAD-CAM surgical guide for dental implant surgery on the anterior maxilla: An in vitro study

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the reliability of the chair-side CAD-CAM surgical guide (CSG) in the anterior maxilla by comparing its accuracy with the laboratory 3D-printed surgical guide (3DSG) and manual surgical guide (MSG) concerning different levels of dentists' surgical experience.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten surgical guides of each type (MSG, 3DSG, and CSG) were fabricated on a control study model with missing right and left central incisors. Sixty implants were placed in 30 study models by two dentists (one inexperienced and one experienced) using three different types of surgical guides. Horizontal deviations at shoulder and at apex, vertical, and angular deviations were measured after superimposing the planned and placed implant positions in the software. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare the accuracy of three types of surgical guides in each dentist group and the accuracy of each surgical guide between two dentists (α = .05).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in any deviations between CSG and 3DSG, apart from angular deviation, for both dentists' groups. Moreover, both CSG and 3DSG showed no significant differences in accuracy between the two dentists (P > .05). In contrast, MSG demonstrated significant differences from CSG and 3DSG and a significant difference in accuracy between the two dentists (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

CSG provides superior accuracy to MSG in implant placement in the maxillary anterior region and is comparable to 3DSG at different levels of surgical experience, while offering the benefits of shorter manufacturing time and reduced patient visits.

Is dynamic computer-assisted surgery more accurate than the static method for dental implant placement? A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Dynamic computer-assisted surgery for dental implant placement has become popular, but systematic comparisons of the accuracy of computer-assisted surgery with static surgery are lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine evidence on the difference in the accuracy of dynamic computer-assisted surgery compared with the static method for dental implant placement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in 3 electronic databases: PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane. Studies conducted on dental implants that compared the accuracy of positioning implants with a dynamic system with that of a static system were included. Randomized clinical trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, and in vitro studies were included in the review. Review articles, case reports, letters, opinion articles, commentaries, and nonpeer-reviewed literature were excluded.

RESULTS

Of the 26 full-text articles, 14 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of these, 2 were randomized clinical trials, 2 were prospective studies, and 1 was a retrospective cohort study. The remaining 9 were in vitro studies. A total of 1633 implants were placed with the static and 902 with the dynamic method. A significant mean difference (-0.51 degrees [95% CI: -0.90, -0.13]) between dynamic and static systems was only observed in the angular deviation of in vitro studies (P=.009). Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager statistical software and forest plots were generated.

CONCLUSIONS

A difference was found in the angular deviation of implants placed with the dynamic approach compared with the static system. The dynamic system was better, but this difference was not demonstrable in clinical studies. No significant difference was found in the apical and coronal deviations of the dynamic and static systems.

Accuracy of freehand versus guided immediate implant placement: A randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aimed to compare the accuracy of immediate implant placement with freehand and static guided surgery.

METHODS

An RCT was conducted on 61 subjects who received a total of 80 dental implants. The enrolled patients were randomly allocated to two groups: freehand surgery (control group, n = 40 implants) and static guided surgery with R2Gate® (Megagen, Gyeongbuk, South Korea, test group, n = 40 implants). Crestal and apical deviations in both mesiodistal and buccolingual dimensions, as well as depth and angular deviations, were calculated by comparing the three-dimensional (3D) position of the implant in the planning software with the final implant position, revealed by an intraoral scan of the fixture after placement. The Mann-Whitney test was used for comparative assessment.

RESULTS

In the freehand group (control), crestal deviations of 1.13 ± 0.89 mm and 1.00 ± 0.76 mm were found in the mesiodistal and buccolingual directions, respectively, versus 0.34 ± 0.26 mm (p<0.001) and 0.37 ± 0.24 mm (p = 0.03) in the static guided surgery group (test). Apical deviation was also higher in the freehand group (control) than in the static guided surgery group (test) in the mesiodistal (4.04 ± 1.90 mm vs. 0.97 ± 0.55 mm, p = 0.04) and buccolingual directions (3.46 ± 1.82 mm vs. 0.94 ± 0.67 mm, p = 0.02). Freehand surgery had greater angular deviation (6.09° ± 3.23) compared to guided surgery (0.83° ± 0.53, p = 0.02). However, depth deviation was similar in the freehand surgery group (2.24 ± 1.58 mm) and static guided surgery group (0.66 ± 0.43, p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate implant placement with static guided surgery demonstrated better accuracy than freehand surgery.

STATEMENT OF CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Guided implant surgery showed fewer deviations compared to freehand surgery in fresh extraction sockets; therefore, the use of static guides should be given preference over the freehand modality.

Accuracy of Computer-Guided Implantology with Pilot Drill Surgical Guide: Retrospective 3D Radiologic Investigation in Partially Edentulous Patients

Background and Objectives: Implant placement with static navigation enables the reaching of a correct position of implants from an anatomical and prosthetic point of view. Different approaches of static navigation are described in the scientific literature, and the pilot-guided approach is one of the least investigated. The aim of the present study is the evaluation of the accuracy of implant insertion using a pilot drill template. Materials and Methods: Fifteen partially edentulous patients, requiring an implant rehabilitation of at least one implant, were enrolled. Pre- and post-operative low-dose CTs were acquired to measure the differences between final positions of implants and virtually planned ones. Three linear discrepancies (coronal, apical, and depth), two angular ones (bucco-lingual and mesio-distal), and the imprecision area were evaluated. Correlations between accuracy and rehabilitated jaws, sectors, and implant length and diameters were also analyzed. Results: Forty implants were inserted in fifteen patients using pilot drill templates. Mean coronal deviation was 1.08 mm, mean apical deviation was 1.77 mm, mean depth deviation was -0.48 mm, mean bucco-lingual angular deviation was 4.75°, and mean mesio-distal one was 5.22°. The accuracy was statistically influenced only by the rehabilitated jaw for coronal discrepancy and sectors and implant diameter for bucco-lingual angular deviations. Conclusions: The pilot drill template could represent a predictable solution to obtain a correct implant placement. Nonetheless, a safety margin of at least 2 mm should be respected during implant planning to prevent damages to anatomical structures. Therefore, the tool is helpful in order to prosthetically drive the implants; still, great attention must be paid in fully relying on this procedure when approaching dangerous structures such as nerves and vessels.

Performance of novice versus experienced surgeons for dental implant placement with freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches

Lack of evidence exists related to the investigation of the accuracy and efficacy of novice versus experienced practitioners for dental implant placement. Hence, the following in vitro study was conducted to assess the accuracy of implant positioning and self-efficacy of novice compared to experienced surgeons for placing implant using freehand (FH), pilot drill-based partial guidance (PPG) and dynamic navigation (DN) approaches. The findings revealed that DN significantly improved the angular accuracy of implant placement compared with FH (P < 0.001) and PPG approaches (P < 0.001). The time required with DN was significantly longer than FH and PPG (P < 0.001), however, it was similar for both novice and experienced practitioners. The surgeon's self-confidence questionnaire suggested that novice practitioners scored higher with both guided approaches, whereas experienced practitioners achieved higher scoring with PPG and FH compared to DN. In conclusion, implant placement executed under the guidance of DN showed high accuracy irrespective of the practitioner's experience. The application of DN could be regarded as a beneficial tool for novices who offered high confidence of using the navigation system with the same level of accuracy and surgical time as that of experienced practitioners.

Accuracy of partially and fully guided surgical techniques for immediate implant placement: An in vitro assessment

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Optimal implant positioning is essential to achieving predictable results. Computer-guided surgery has been reported to be an accurate technique for implant placement in healed sites, but the accuracy of guided techniques for immediate implant placement into fresh sockets is still unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this experimental randomized split-mouth study in pig jaws was to determine the accuracy of partially and fully guided surgical techniques for immediate implant placement into fresh sockets and to compare 2 different methods of implant position deviations analysis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty implants were installed in 10 pig jaws using 2 different techniques: partially guided (n=10) and fully guided (n=10). Cone beam computed tomography and digital scanning were performed before and after the surgical procedure to plan the virtual implant position and fabricate the surgical guide, as well as to determine implant position deviations. Two methods were used to evaluate implant deviations: tomographic and digital scanning. The Shapiro-Wilk test of normality was used. Deviation comparisons were carried out by using paired t tests (α=.05), and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was computed to assess the agreement between the 2 methods of implant deviation analysis.

RESULTS

In the tomographic analysis, the partially guided technique resulted in significantly higher global apical and lateral coronal deviations (2.25 ±0.59 mm; 0.96 ±0.55 mm) than fully guided (1.52 ±0.89 mm; 0.75 ±0.52 mm) (P<.01 and P<.05, respectively). The analysis performed using digital scanning showed significantly higher angular, global apical, and lateral apical deviations in the partially guided (6 ±3.28 degrees; 2.49 ±1.03 mm; 2.16 ±1.07 mm) technique than in the fully guided (3.32 ±1.84 degrees; 1.5 ±0.58 mm; 0.98 ±0.67 mm) (P<.05). An ICC of 0.522 between the 2 methods of implant deviation analysis was obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

The partially guided technique was less accurate than the fully guided technique for immediate implant placement into fresh sockets. A moderate concordance was observed between cone beam computed tomography and digital scanning analyses, suggesting that more studies are required to validate and to define the most reliable method of measuring implant deviation.

Investigation on the application of digital guide templates guided dental implantation in China

BACKGROUND

The aim of this survey is to investigate the application of digital guide templates (DGTs) across China, and the views and attitudes of oral health professionals toward them.

METHODS

This survey was prepared, distributed, and collected by WJX. Chinese oral health professionals were invited to participate in it. The basic information of respondents, the application of DGTs, and the views and attitudes toward their status quo and development were statistically described. Chi-square test was used to evaluate the correlation between the basic information of respondents and the application of DGTs as well as the views and attitudes toward them.

RESULTS

A total of 276 questionnaires were collected, of which 273 were identified as valid. 269 (98.5%) respondents were dental clinical workers, 204 (74.7%) were dental clinical implant workers, and 152 (55.7%) had been engaged in the implant industry for more than five years. The chi-square test showed that working years were significantly correlated with the half-guided, tooth-supported, and mucosa-supported DGTs (P < 0.05); and professional backgrounds and working years presented significant differences in the views and attitudes toward the status quo and development of DGTs (P < 0.05). The questionnaires also made a preliminary investigation and evaluation on the factors influencing accuracy, indications, doctors' recommendations and relevant training.

CONCLUSION

Most respondents held a positive attitude toward the accuracy and development of DGTs. This survey can point out the direction for the improvement of DGTs, and provide a reference for the study of factors affecting implant accuracy, the establishment of a training system, and the understanding of clinicians' current views on DGTs. Trial registration This survey was approved by the Ethics Review Committee of Chenghuaxinguanghua Dental Clinic (Approval NO. CDCIRB-D-2021-201).

A Novel Approach to Guided Implant Surgery: A Technical Note

Computer-guided software and kits have significantly improved the clinical applications of implant surgery. Nonetheless, some technical problems are still in evidence during clinical procedures because of cumbersome surgical tools that can limit access to implant sites, mainly in posterior areas of the mouth in the presence of bulky anatomical structures and in patients with reduced mouth-opening capacity. The present paper aimed to present a novel approach to guided implant surgery, describing the technical characteristics of an innovative guided surgical kit made up of modified sleeves and modular surgical drills. The proposed guided surgical kit is based on a novel patented system of sleeves and modular burs, with an increased length of the metal sleeves and a reduced height of the drills. The innovative design of the proposed system would allow the clinician to position guided fixtures in all clinical situations; the reduced encumbrance would be particularly helpful to gain access to the posterior areas of both maxilla and mandible, which have limited inter-arch space, with an easy and user-friendly approach. The modular system could overcome anatomical limitations, such as reduced mouth-opening capacity, and permit clinicians to maintain the stability and integrity of the surgical templates, even in cases where there is very limited intermaxillary space.

[Accuracy of computer-guided oral implant placement and influencing factors]

With the development of computer and digital technology, the application of computer-aided technology has become a new trend in the field of oral implant. Computer-guided oral implant surgery has the advantages of being safer and more accurate than traditional implant surgery, and it can truly realize the concept of restoration-oriented implant. However, computer-guided oral implant surgery has various steps which cause deviations accumulation, so that some clinicians remain sceptical about the accuracy of the technology. Currently, due to the lack of a quantitative system for evaluating the accuracy of computer-guided oral implantation, the implant deviation in each step is still inconclusively in the stage of research and debate. The purpose of this paper is to summarize the advantages and disadvantages, research progress, accuracy and influencing factors of computer-guided oral implantation, aiming to provide a reference for improving implant accuracy and guiding clinical design and surgery.

The influence of crown coverage on the accuracy of static guided implant surgery in partially edentulous models: An in vitro study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the influence of crown coverage of surgical guides on the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgeries (sCAISs) in different partially edentulous situations.

METHODS

Acrylic models with five types of partially edentulous situations were fabricated in this study. In coDiagnostiX software (Dental Wings, Montreal, Canada), surgical templates were designed and fabricated with reduced crown coverage (RCC), standard crown coverage (SCC) and extended crown coverage (ECC). Then, fully guided implant placement into the acrylic models was performed by dental surgeons with more than 10 years of experience. In total, 120 models and 120 guides were manufactured, and 168 bone-level Straumann replica implants (4.1 × 10 mm, Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) were inserted. Postoperative implant positions were scanned (Trios 3, 3 shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) and compared with the preplanned virtual positions via coDiagnostiX (Dental Wings, Montreal, Canada). The angular, coronal and apical deviations were measured and analyzed to evaluate the accuracy of implant insertion. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test.

RESULTS

For single tooth missing situations, the RCC group was similar to the SCC group and ECC group in anterior sites. In premolar or molar sites, the SCC and ECC groups had no statistically significant difference (p > .05), while the RCC group had more coronal and apical deviation (p < .05). For multiple teeth missing situations, there was no difference among the RCC, SCC and ECC groups (p > .05). No difference was found among the five edentulous situations with different CCs (p > .05).

CONCLUSION

The CC of templates can significantly affect the accuracy of guided surgeries when implants are inserted in a single gap at posterior sites. Templates with CC extended to the undercut line may be an optimal choice for static guided surgeries.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The accuracy of static guided implant surgery can be influenced by the CC of templates, and proper CC with the guide covering extending to the undercut line may contribute to improved accuracy. CC should be taken into consideration when designing surgical templates.

Consumer vs. High-End 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery-An In Vitro Accuracy Assessment Study of Different 3D Printing Technologies

This study evaluates the accuracy of drill guides fabricated in medical-grade, biocompatible materials for static, computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS). The virtually planned drill guides of ten completed patient cases were printed (n = 40) using professional (Material Jetting (MJ)) and consumer-level three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies, namely, Stereolithography (SLA), Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF), and Digital Light Processing (DLP). After printing and post-processing, the drill guides were digitized using an optical scanner. Subsequently, the drill guide's original (reference) data and the surface scans of the digitized 3D-printed drill guide were superimposed to evaluate their incongruencies. The accuracy of the 3D-printed drill guides was calculated by determining the root mean square (RMS) values. Additionally, cast models of the planned cases were used to check that the drill guides fitted manually. The RMS (mean ± SD) values for the accuracy of 3D-printed drill guides were-MJ (0.09 ± 0.01 mm), SLA (0.12 ± 0.02 mm), FFF (0.18 ± 0.04 mm), and DLP (0.25 ± 0.05 mm). Upon a subjective assessment, all drill guides could be mounted on the cast models without hindrance. The results revealed statistically significant differences (p < 0.01) in all except the MJ- and SLA-printed drill guides. Although the measured differences in accuracy were statistically significant, the deviations were negligible from a clinical point of view. Within the limits of this study, we conclude that consumer-level 3D printers can produce surgical guides with a similar accuracy to a high-end, professional 3D printer with reduced costs.

A comparative retrospective study of different surgical guide designs for static computer-assisted implant surgery in posterior single edentulous sites

AIM

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.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSIONS

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.

The question about the numerical value and quantitative data transfer of implant prosthodontics-orom experience guidance to digital guidance

The correct implant site design and placement are the basic clinical techniques that must be known for implant restoration. For a long time, most implants have been placed by free hands, and the choice of site is mostly dependent on the accumulation of long-term experience of the surgeon. The selection of implant site guided by this experience analogy logic is often based on the surgeon's level of experience,which often makes it very easy to produce complications related to the implant restoration of the incorrect site. In contrast, a clinical program using digital guidance and real-time measurable verification has emerged based on the restoration-oriented implantation concept, which marks the formation of an accurate, measurable and verifiable whole-process digital implant prototype. Furthermore, from the perspective of surveying, the numerical requirements that digital implant restoration relies on are actually incomplete to the four elements of measurement, which leading to the doubts about its authenticity. This article will question the numbers in implant restoration, and conduct a preliminary demonstration, and propose a new reliable actual measurement and verification method of the correct location and the numerical requirements of the restoration space and a new clinical program that relies on numbers from the perspective of the evolution of digital restoration, guided implantology and actual measurement technology. And this article further discusses the current mainstream implant restoration technology based on experience analogy which cannot effectively support the whole process of digital implant restoration and provides a new logical cognitive basis for the final realization of the entire process of digital implant restoration.

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 of implant placement accuracy in two different preoperative digital workflows: navigated vs. pilot-drill-guided surgery

Background

The aim of the study is to evaluate the accuracy of a new implant navigation system on two different digital workflows.

Methods

A total of 18 phantom jaws consisting of hard and non-warping plastic and resembling edentulous jaws were used to stimulate a clinical circumstance. A conventional pilot-drill guide was conducted by a technician, and a master model was set by using this laboratory-produced guide. After cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and 3D scanning of the master models, two different digital workflows (marker tray in CBCT and 3D-printed tray) were performed based on the Digital Imaging Communication in Medicine files and standard tessellation language files. Eight Straumann implants (4.1 mm × 10 mm) were placed in each model, six models for each group, resulting in 144 implant placements in total. Postoperative CBCT were taken, and deviations at the entry point and apex as well as angular deviations were measured compared to the master model.

Results

The mean total deviations at the implant entry point for MTC (marker tray in CBCT), 3dPT (3d-printed tray), and PDG (pilot-drill guide) were 1.024 ± 0.446 mm, 1.027 ± 0.455 mm, and 1.009 ± 0.415 mm, respectively, and the mean total deviations at the implant apex were 1.026 ± 0.383 mm, 1.116 ± 0.530 mm, and 1.068 ± 0.384 mm. The angular deviation for the MTC group was 2.22 ± 1.54°. The 3dPT group revealed an angular deviation of 1.95 ± 1.35°, whereas the PDG group showed a mean angular deviation of 2.67 ± 1.58°. Although there were no significant differences among the three groups (P > 0.05), the navigation groups showed lesser angular deviations compared to the pilot-drill-guide (PDG) group. Implants in the 3D-printed tray navigation group showed higher deviations at both entry point and apex.

Conclusions

The accuracy of the evaluated navigation system was similar with the accuracy of a pilot-drill guide. Accuracy of both preoperative workflows (marker tray in CBCT or 3D-printed tray) was reliable for clinical use.

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.

Accuracy of Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical and In Vitro Studies

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to analyze the accuracy of implant placement using computer-assisted dynamic navigation procedures. An electronic literature search was carried out, supplemented by a manual search. The literature search was completed in June 2020. The results of in vitro and clinical studies were recorded separately from each other. For inclusion in the review, the studies had to examine at least the prosthetically relevant parameters for angle deviation, as well as global deviation or lateral deviation at the platform of the implant. Sixteen of 320 articles were included in the investigation: nine in vitro and seven clinical studies. The meta-analysis showed values of 4.1° for the clinical studies (95% CI, 3.12-5.10) and 3.7° for the in vitro studies (95% CI, 2.31-5.10) in terms of the angle deviation. The global deviation at the implant apex of the implant was 1.00 mm for the clinical studies (95% CI, 0.83-1.16) and 0.91 mm for the in vitro studies (95% CI, 0.60-1.12). These values indicate no significant difference between the clinical and in vitro studies. The results of this systematic review show a clinical accuracy of dynamic computer-assisted navigation that is comparable to that of static navigation. However, the dynamic navigation systems show a great heterogeneity that must be taken into account. Moreover, currently there are few clinical data available. Therefore, further investigations into the practicability of dynamic navigation seem necessary.

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.

Accuracy of Guided Implant Surgery in the Edentulous Jaw Using Desktop 3D-Printed Mucosal Supported Guides

Purpose: The aim of this in vitro study is to evaluate the accuracy of implant position using mucosal supported surgical guides, produced by a desktop 3D printer. Methods: Ninety implants (Bone Level Roxolid, 4.1 mm × 10 mm, Straumann, Villerat, Switzerland) were placed in fifteen mandibular casts (Bonemodels, Castellón de la Plana, Spain). A mucosa-supported guide was designed and printed for each of the fifteen casts. After placement of the implants, the location was assessed by scanning the cast and scan bodies with an intra-oral scanner (Primescan^®, Dentsply Sirona, York, PA, USA). Two comparisons were performed: one with the mucosa as a reference, and one where only the implants were aligned. Angular, coronal and apical deviations were measured. Results: The mean implant angular deviation for tissue and implant alignment were 3.25° (SD 1.69°) and 2.39° (SD 1.42°) respectively, the coronal deviation 0.82 mm (SD 0.43 mm) and 0.45 mm (SD 0.31 mm) and the apical deviation 0.99 mm (SD 0.45 mm) and 0.71 mm (SD 0.43 mm). All three variables were significantly different between the tissue and implant alignment (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, we conclude that guided implant surgery using desktop 3D printed mucosa-supported guides has a clinically acceptable level of accuracy. The resilience of the mucosa has a negative effect on the guide stability and increases the deviation in implant position.