Accuracy of a chairside, fused deposition modeling three‐dimensional‐printed, single tooth surgical guide for implant placement: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Accuracy of surgical guides manufactured with four different 3D printers. A comparative in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of surgical guides manufactured with four different 3D printers..

METHODS

Forty-eight surgical guides (BlueSky Plan, BlueSky Bio) were produced using four different 3D printers, with strict adherence to each manufacturer's instructions. The printers used were three digital light processing (DLP) printers (SolFlex170, VC; Nextdent5100, ND, and D30+Rapidshape, RS) and one stereolithographic (SLA) printer (Formlabs3B+, FL). The study evaluated the trueness and precision of the overall surface, the region of interest (RoI) (occlusal and guide zone), the repeatability in several batches, and the guide hole's diameter and xyz axes. The printed guides were digitized and compared with the CAD design control specimen (Control X, Geomagic). Descriptive statistics and Kruskal-Wallis tests with post-hoc Mann-Whitney tests were performed (α=0.05).

RESULTS

Differences in trueness and precision were found between groups in the overall zone and RoI (p = 0.00). The ND group demonstrated the highest repeatability. Only the RS group exhibited a comparable guide hole diameter to the master specimen (5.27±2.12 mm; p = 0.104). No statistical differences were observed between groups in the x and z axes. However, in the y-axis, the VC group displayed statistically significant differences (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that the DLP groups had better overall accuracy, while the SLA group had the best results in the RoI. The manufacturer's workflows demonstrated a high reproducibility between batches in the RoI. The RS group had values most similar values to the guide hole diameter of the master specimen, with minimal deviations in guide hole orientation.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Implant position can be affected by the accuracy of the 3D printed surgical guide. Therefore, it is critical to analyze the final dimensions and the direction of the guide hole using available printing technologies.

Accuracy of dynamic navigation compared to static surgical guides and the freehand approach in implant placement: a prospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

Computer-guided implant surgery has improved the quality of implant treatment by facilitating the placement of implants in a more accurate manner. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of implant placement in a clinical setting using three techniques: dynamic navigation, static surgical guides, and freehand placement. We also investigated potential factors influencing accuracy to provide a comprehensive evaluation of each technique's advantages and disadvantages.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-four implants in 65 patients were included in this prospective study. Patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups: dynamic navigation, static surgical guides, or freehand placement. Implants were placed using a prosthetically oriented digital implant planning approach, and postoperative CBCT scans were superimposed on preoperative plans to measure accuracy. Seven deviation values were calculated, including angular, platform, and apical deviations. Demographic and consistency analyses were performed, along with one-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests for deviation values.

RESULTS

The mean global platform, global apical, and angular deviations were 0.99 mm (SD 0.52), 1.14 mm (SD 0.56), and 3.66° (SD 1.64°) for the dynamic navigation group; 0.92 mm (SD 0.36), 1.06 mm (SD 0.47), and 2.52° (SD 1.18°) for the surgical guide group; and 1.36 mm (SD 0.62), 1.73 mm (SD 0.66), and 5.82° (SD 2.79°) for the freehand group. Both the dynamic navigation and surgical guide groups exhibited statistically significant differences in all values except depth deviations compared to the freehand group (p < 0.05), whereas only the angular deviation showed a significant difference between the dynamic navigation and surgical guide groups (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the superior accuracy and consistency of dynamic navigation and static surgical guides compared to freehand placement in implant surgery. Dynamic navigation offers precision and flexibility. However, it comes with cost and convenience considerations. Future research should focus on improving its practicality.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was retrospectively registered at the Thai Clinical Trials Register-Medical Research Foundation of Thailand (MRF) with the TCTR identification number TCTR20230804001 on 04/08/2023. It was also conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the institutional ethics committee at the Xian Jiaotong University Hospital of Stomatology, Xian, China (xjkqII[2021] No: 043). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Accuracy of additively manufactured and steam sterilized surgical guides by means of continuous liquid interface production, stereolithography, digital light processing, and fused filament fabrication

Different printing technologies can be used for prosthetically oriented implant placement, however the influence of different printing orientations and steam sterilization remains unclear. In particular, no data is available for the novel technology Continuous Liquid Interface Production. The objective was to evaluate the dimensional accuracy of surgical guides manufactured with different printing techniques in vertical and horizontal printing orientation before and after steam sterilization. A total of 80 surgical guides were manufactured by means of continuous liquid interface production (CLIP; material: Keyguide, Keyprint), digital light processing (DLP; material: Luxaprint Ortho, DMG), stereolithography (SLA; Surgical guide, Formlabs), and fused filament fabrication (FFF; material: Clear Base Support, Arfona) in vertical and horizontal printing orientation (n = 10 per subgroup). Spheres were included in the design to determine the coordinates of 17 reference points. Each specimen was digitized with a laboratory scanner after additive manufacturing (AM) and after steam sterilization (134 °C). To determine the accuracy, root mean square values (RMS) were calculated and coordinates of the reference points were recorded. Based on the measured coordinates, deviations of the reference points and relevant distances were calculated. Paired t-tests and one-way ANOVA were applied for statistical analysis (significance p < 0.05). After AM, all printing technologies showed comparable high accuracy, with an increased deviation in z-axis when printed horizontally. After sterilization, FFF printed surgical guides showed distinct warpage. The other subgroups showed no significant differences regarding the RMS of the corpus after steam sterilization (p > 0.05). Regarding reference points and distances, CLIP showed larger deviations compared to SLA in both printing orientations after steam sterilization, while DLP manufactured guides were the most dimensionally stable. In conclusion, the different printing technologies and orientations had little effect on the manufacturing accuracy of the surgical guides before sterilization. However, after sterilization, FFF surgical guides exhibited significant deformation making their clinical use impossible. CLIP showed larger deformations due to steam sterilization than the other photopolymerizing techniques, however, discrepancies may be considered within the range of clinical acceptance. The influence on the implant position remains to be evaluated.

Accuracy of implant placement with computer-aided static, dynamic, and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials

This systematic review explores the accuracy of computerized guided implant placement including computer-aided static, dynamic, and robot-assisted surgery. An electronic search up to February 28, 2023, was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases using the search terms "surgery", "computer-assisted", "dynamic computer-assisted", "robotic surgical procedures", and "dental implants". The outcome variables were discrepancies including the implant's 3D-coronal, -apical and -angular deviations. Articles were selectively retrieved according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the data were quantitatively meta-analysed to verify the study outcomes. Sixty-seven articles were finally identified and included for analysis. The accuracy comparison revealed an overall mean deviation at the entry point of 1.11 mm (95% CI: 1.02-1.19), and 1.40 mm (95% CI: 1.31-1.49) at the apex, and the angulation was 3.51˚ (95% CI: 3.27-3.75). Amongst computerized guided implant placements, the robotic system tended to show the lowest deviation (0.81 mm in coronal deviation, 0.77 mm in apical deviation, and 1.71˚ in angular deviation). No significant differences were found between the arch type and flap operation in cases of dynamic navigation. The fully-guided protocol demonstrated a significantly higher level of accuracy compared to the pilot-guided protocol, but did not show any significant difference when compared to the partially guided protocol. The use of computerized technology clinically affirms that operators can accurately place implants in three directions. Several studies agree that a fully guided protocol is the gold standard in clinical practice.

Novel Technique of Interproximal Enamel Reduction Based on Computer-Aided Navigation Technique-An In Vitro Study

The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the accuracy of a novel interproximal enamel reduction (IPR) technique based on a computer-aided static navigation technique with respect to a conventional free-hand-based technique for interproximal enamel reduction. Twenty anatomical-based experimental cast models of polyurethane were randomly distributed into the following IPR techniques: IPR technique based on computer-aided static navigation technique (n = 10) (GI) for Group A and conventional free-hand-based technique for the IPR (n = 10) (FHT) for Group B. The anatomical-based experimental cast models of polyurethane randomly assigned to the GI study group were submitted for a preoperative 3D intraoral surface scan; then, datasets were uploaded into 3D implant-planning software to design virtual templates for the interproximal enamel reduction technique. Afterward, the anatomical-based experimental cast models of polyurethane of both GI and FHT study groups were subjected to a postoperative digital impression by a 3D intraoral surface scan to compare the accuracy of the interproximal enamel reduction techniques at the buccal (mm), lingual/palatal (mm), and angular (◦) levels using the Student t-test. Statistically significant differences between the interproximal enamel reduction technique based on the computer-aided static navigation technique and the conventional free-hand-based technique for the interproximal enamel reduction at the buccal (p = 0.0008) and lingual/palatal (p < 0.0001) levels; however, no statistically significant differences were shown at the angular level (p = 0.1042). The interproximal enamel reduction technique based on computer-aided static navigation technique was more accurate than the conventional free-hand-based technique for interproximal enamel reduction.

3D printed biomedical devices and their applications: A review on state-of-the-art technologies, existing challenges, and future perspectives

3D printing, also known as Additive manufacturing (AM), has emerged as a transformative technology with applications across various industries, including the medical sector. This review paper provides an overview of the current status of AM technology, its challenges, and its application in the medical industry. The paper covers the different types of AM technologies, such as fused deposition modeling, stereolithography, selective laser sintering, digital light processing, binder jetting, and electron beam melting, and their suitability for medical applications. The most commonly used biomedical materials in AM, such as plastic, metal, ceramic, composite, and bio-inks, are also viewed. The challenges of AM technology, such as material selection, accuracy, precision, regulatory compliance, cost and quality control, and standardization, are also discussed. The review also highlights the various applications of AM in the medical sector, including the production of patient-specific surgical guides, prosthetics, orthotics, and implants. Finally, the review highlights the Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) and artificial intelligence (AI) for regulatory frameworks and safety standards for 3D-printed biomedical devices. The review concludes that AM technology can transform the healthcare industry by enabling patients to access more personalized and reasonably priced treatment alternatives. Despite the challenges, integrating AI and IoMT with 3D printing technology is expected to play a vital role in the future of biomedical device applications, leading to further advancements and improvements in patient care. More research is needed to address the challenges and optimize its use for medical applications to utilize AM's potential in the medical industry fully.

Influence of planning software and surgical template design on the accuracy of static computer assisted implant surgery performed using surgical guides fabricated with material extrusion technology: An in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

This in vitro study aimed to assess the influence of the planning software and design of the surgical template on both trueness and precision of static computer assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) performed using surgical guides fabricated using material extrusion (ME).

METHODS

Three-dimensional radiographic and surface scans of a typodont were aligned using two planning software (coDiagnostiX, CDX; ImplantStudio, IST) to virtually position the two adjacent oral implants. Thereafter, surgical guides were created with either an original (O) or modified (M) design with reduced occlusal support and were steam sterilized. Forty surgical guides were used to instal 80 implants equally distributed among four groups: CDX-O, CDX-M, IST-O, and IST-M. Thereafter, the scan bodies were adapted to the implants and digitised. Finally, inspection software was used to assess discrepancies between the planned and final positions at the implant shoulder and main axis level. Multilevel mixed-effects generalised linear models were used for statistical analyses (p = 0.05).

RESULTS

In terms of trueness, the largest average vertical deviations (0.29 ± 0.07 mm) could be assessed for CDX-M. Overall, vertical errors were significantly dependent on the design (O < M; p ≤ 0.001). Furthermore, in horizontal direction, the largest mean discrepancy was 0.32 ± 0.09 mm (IST-O) and 0.31 ± 0.13 mm (CDX-M). CDX-O was superior compared to IST-O (p = 0.003) regarding horizontal trueness. The average deviations regarding the main implant axis ranged between 1.36 ± 0.41 ° (CDX-O) and 2.63 ± 0.87 ° (CDX-M). In terms of precision, mean standard deviation intervals of ≤ 0.12 mm (IST-O and -M) and ≤ 1.09 ° (CDX-M) were calculated.

CONCLUSIONS

Implant installation with clinically acceptable deviations is possible with ME surgical guides. Both evaluated variables affected trueness and precision with negligible differences.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The planning system and design influenced the accuracy of implant installation using ME-based surgical guides. Nevertheless, discrepancies were ≤ 0.32 mm and ≤ 2.63 °, which may be considered within the range of clinical acceptance. ME should be further investigated as an alternative to the more expensive and time-consuming 3D printing technologies.

Accuracy of automatic and manual dynamic navigation registration techniques for dental implant surgery in posterior sites missing a single tooth: A retrospective clinical analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative accuracy of manual (U-shaped tube) and automatic (two-in-one) dynamic navigation registration techniques for implant surgery performed in posterior sites missing one tooth.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 58 partially edentulous patients with 58 implants, including 31 and 27 in the manual and automatic groups. Deviations between the planned and actual implant placement were assessed.

RESULTS

The angular deviation in the overall study cohort was 2.54 ± 1.21°, while the 3D deviations at the implant platform and apex were 0.90 ± 0.46 mm and 1.04 ± 0.47 mm, respectively. The respective angular deviations in the manual and automatic groups were 2.82 ± 1.17° and 2.21 ± 1.19° (p > .05), while platform deviations were 0.89 ± 0.48 mm and 0.91 ± 0.45 mm (p > .05), and apex deviations were 0.99 ± 0.48 mm and 1.11 ± 0.46 mm (p > .05). No significant differences in absolute buccolingual, mesiodistal, or apicocoronal deviations were detected between these groups at either level (p > .05) nor were did deviation distributions differ in the buccolingual, mesiodistal, or apicocoronal directions at the platform or apex levels (p > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Manual and automatic dynamic navigation registration techniques can achieve excellent accuracy when placing implants in posterior sites missing a single tooth. The two-in-one automatic registration technique can reduce the amount of time and intraoperative steps necessary to complete the registration process relative to the manual U-shaped tube registration technique. Further follow-up studies are necessary to expand on these results.

Additive manufacturing technologies in the oral implant clinic: A review of current applications and progress

Additive manufacturing (AM) technologies can enable the direct fabrication of customized physical objects with complex shapes, based on computer-aided design models. This technology is changing the digital manufacturing industry and has become a subject of considerable interest in digital implant dentistry. Personalized dentistry implant treatments for individual patients can be achieved through Additive manufacturing. Herein, we review the applications of Additive manufacturing technologies in oral implantology, including implant surgery, and implant and restoration products, such as surgical guides for implantation, custom titanium meshes for bone augmentation, personalized or non-personalized dental implants, custom trays, implant casts, and implant-support frameworks, among others. In addition, this review also focuses on Additive manufacturing technologies commonly used in oral implantology. Stereolithography, digital light processing, and fused deposition modeling are often used to construct surgical guides and implant casts, whereas direct metal laser sintering, selective laser melting, and electron beam melting can be applied to fabricate dental implants, personalized titanium meshes, and denture frameworks. Moreover, it is sometimes required to combine Additive manufacturing technology with milling and other cutting and finishing techniques to ensure that the product is suitable for its final application.