Abstract:Statement of problem. Conventional radiographic methods are widely used to evaluate the clinical accuracy of implant position. However, such methods require a second computerized tomography (CT) scan and manual registration between presurgical and postsurgical CT data. The alignment errors cannot be calculated. Purpose. The purpose of this clinical study was to introduce a completely digital registration method to evaluate the clinical accuracy of implant position. The digital registration method was then compared with the radiographic method in evaluating accuracy. Some of the alignment errors produced in the digital registration procedures were recorded. Material and methods. A total of 32 implants from 19 patients with sufficient bone volume were enrolled in the study, and all implant surgeries were conducted by one experienced practitioner. Before the surgery, a cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) scan was made for each patient along with a diagnostic impression to design the ideal implant position using the Simplant software. After the surgery, the postsurgical implant position was determined using an optical scan of the dentition cast and a series of custom registration models (the digital registration method). A simulated cylinder was designed using the Geomagic Studio software to represent the implant, and the deviation of the ideal and postsurgical implant position was calculated. The accuracy evaluated by the 2 methods was also compared. The parameters of the entrance point, apical point, and axis were recorded for each implant. A part of the alignment errors in the digital registration was calculated automatically and recorded. One sample t test and paired t test were conducted by using a statistical software program. Results. The mean deviation between the ideal and postsurgical implant positions evaluated using the digital registration method was 0.84 +/- 0.57 mm for the entrance point, 1.03 +/- 0.78 mm for the apical point, and 4.52 +/- 2.37 degrees for the angulation. No significant difference was found between the accuracy evaluated by the digital registration method and the radiographic method (P>.05). In the digital registration procedure, the alignment error was 0.03 mm for the registration model and 0.29 mm for the dentition. Significant differences were found in the alignment procedure of the impression cylinder (P<.001) and dentition (P<.001). The average positive and negative errors were +0.09 and -0.19 mm for the simulated cylinder of the ideal implant and +0.08 and -0.15 mm for the simulated cylinder of the postsurgical implant. Conclusions. The precision of the digital registration method could be accepted in clinical applications. No significant difference was found between the digital registration method and the radiographic method in evaluating the clinical accuracy of the implant position. The digital registration method was able to control and minimize the alignment errors produced during data processing.

Clinical evaluation of a radiographic film holder for standardized alignment of intraoral film

Use of a Simple Intraoral Instrument to Standardize Film Alignment and Improve Image Reproducibility.

Efficacy of a radiographic film holder adapter in generating radiographs of dental implants with improved geometric accuracy and sharpness

Evaluation of the Marginal Adaptation and Gingival Status of Full-Crown Restorations Using an Intraoral Camera

A Technique to Fabricate a Custom CAD-CAM Periapical Radiographic Film Holder for Implant Assessment.

Assessing Efficiency and Image Quality of Dental Radiography Using Modified Dental Holders with Silicone Rubber Integration

An innovative evaluation method for clinical comparative analysis of occlusal contact regions obtained via intraoral scanning and conventional impression procedures: a clinical trial

[Preliminary Development of Photoelastic Resin Occlusal Film].

The clinic study related to modified vacuum film activator and traditional activator

Accuracy of Intraoral Scanned Digital Model with Metal Brackets

Study of scanning repeatability of intraoral digital impressions

Comparison of Measurements Between Intraoral Scanned Digital Model and Plaster Model

Evaluation of repeatability of different alignment methods to obtain digital interocclusal records: An in vitro study

Investigation of distortion of panoramic radiographs on mandible

Repeatability and validity of a modified method of measuring the occlusal force distribution with the T-scan system and digital models

Accuracy of the evaluation of implant position using a completely digital registration method compared with a radiographic method.

Comparison of the Registration Methods for the Three-Dimensional Facial Scans Applied to the Design of Full-Arch Implant Supported Restoration

Comparison of Different Intraoral Scanners With Prefabricated Aid on Accuracy and Framework Passive Fit of Digital Complete-Arch Implant Impression: An In Vitro Study

[Accuracy and reproducibility of intraoral scanning in vivo]

Accuracy evaluation of 3D-printed dental models used for the fabrication of clear aligners in mild malocclusions

Accuracy of Two Best-Fit Alignment Strategies with Different Reference Areas for Wear Measurement with an Intraoral Scanner: an in Vitro Study.