Accuracy of Different Types of Computer-Aided Design/computer-Aided Manufacturing Surgical Guides for Dental Implant Placement.

Wei Geng,Changying Liu,Yucheng Su,Jun Li,Yanmin Zhou
2015-01-01
Abstract:Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of implants placed using different types of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) surgical guides, including partially guided and totally guided templates, and determine the accuracy of these guides Materials and methods: In total, 111 implants were placed in 24 patients using CAD/CAM surgical guides. After implant insertion, the positions and angulations of the placed implants relative to those of the planned ones were determined using special software that matched pre- and postoperative computed tomography (CT) images, and deviations were calculated and compared between the different guides and templates. Results: The mean angular deviations were 1.72 +/- 1.67 and 2.71 +/- 2.58, the mean deviations in position at the neck were 0.27 +/- 0.24 and 0.69 +/- 0.66 mm, the mean deviations in position at the apex were 0.37 +/- 0.35 and 0.94 +/- 0.75 mm, and the mean depth deviations were 0.32 +/- 0.32 and 0.51 +/- 0.48 mm with tooth-and mucosa-supported stereolithographic guides, respectively (P < .05 for all). The mean distance deviations when partially guided (29 implants) and totally guided templates (30 implants) were used were 0.54 +/- 0.50 mm and 0.89 +/- 0.78 mm, respectively, at the neck and 1.10 +/- 0.85 mm and 0.81 +/- 0.64 mm, respectively, at the apex, with corresponding mean angular deviations of 2.56 +/- 2.23 degrees and 2.90 +/- 3.0 degrees (P >.05 for all). Conclusions: Toothsupported surgical guides may be more accurate than mucosa-supported guides, while both partially and totally guided templates can simplify surgery and aid in optimal implant placement.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?