Accuracy of Dental Implant Placement by a Novel In-House Model-Free and Zero-Setup Fully Guided Surgical Template Made of a Light-Cured Composite Resin (VARO Guide®): A Comparative In Vitro Study

Randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of a custom-made, fully guided implant system for flapless crestal sinus floor elevation: Accuracy and patient-reported outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To compare fully guided flapless implant surgery using a light-cured surgical guide (FG group) with partially guided open flap surgery (PG group) in the posterior maxilla when performing simultaneous sinus floor elevation in terms of the accuracy, time requirements, and patient/clinician-reported outcomes (PROMs and CROMs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, 56 tissue-level implants were placed with crestal sinus floor elevation in 56 patients at single-tooth sites, with 28 implants allocated to the PG group and 28 to the FG group. The deviations of the placed implants from the virtually planned positions were measured at the implant platform and apex and for the angular deviation. The presurgical preparation time and the duration of surgery were measured. PROMs and CROMs were made by administering questionnaires at multiple time points.

RESULTS

Horizontal deviations at the platform and apex and the angular deviation were significantly smaller in the FG group than the PG group (p < .05). Presurgical preparation and surgery times were significantly shorter in the FG group (p < .001). Patient satisfaction and willingness to receive repeat treatment were significantly better in the FG group than in the PG group (p < .005 and .025, respectively). Clinicians were more satisfied in the FG group than the PG group (p < .05).

CONCLUSION

When placing an implant with sinus floor elevation, the flapless approach using a fully guided surgical system can be more accurate, faster, and increase the satisfaction of both the clinician and patient compared to the partially guided surgery.

Effects of a modified surgical protocol on the positional accuracy of dental implants placed using fully guided implant surgery in the partially edentulous posterior ridge with distal extension: a dentiform model study

PURPOSE

The present experiment aimed to evaluate the placement accuracy of fully guided implant surgery using a mucosa-supported surgical guide when the protocol of osteotomy and installation was modified (MP) compared to when the protocol was sequentially and conventionally carried out (CP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For 24 mandibular dentiform models, 12 dentists (6 experts and 6 beginners) performed fully guided implant placements two times at the right first and second molar sites using a mucosa-supported surgical guide, once by the CP (CP group) and at the other time by the MP (MP group). The presurgical and postsurgical stereolithographic images were superimposed, and the deviations between the virtually planned and actually placed implant positions and the procedure time were compared statistically (P < .05).

RESULTS

The accuracies were similar in the CP and MP groups. In the CP group, the mean platform and apex deviations at the second molar site for the beginners were +0.75 mm and +1.14 mm, respectively, which were significantly larger than those for the experts (P < .05). In the MP group, only the mean vertical deviation at the second molar site for the beginners (+0.53 mm) was significantly larger than that for the experts (P < .05). The procedure time was significantly longer for the MP group (+94.0 sec) than for the CP group (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

In fully guided implant surgery using a mucosa-supported guide, the MP may improve the placement accuracy when compared to the CP, especially at sites farther from the most-posterior natural tooth.

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.

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.

Does the fixture thread depth affect the accuracy of implant placement during fully guided immediate implant placement?: A human cadaver study

BACKGROUND

The fixture thread depth reportedly influences the primary stability of dental implant, but its effect on the positional accuracy in immediate implant placement has not been reported previously.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-six single-rooted, anterior and premolar teeth were extracted from six human cadavers, followed by installing either regular-threaded implants (RT group, N = 30) or deep-threaded implants (DT group, N = 26) completely relying on the surgical guide. Optical impressions taken after osteotomy and fixture installation were superimposed with the preoperative virtual planning data to measure the vertical, angular, platform and apex deviations that occurred during osteotomy and installation.

RESULTS

While the osteotomy deviations were similar between the two groups, the angular and apex deviation of the DT group (2.67 ± 2.56°; 1.04 ± 0.49 mm, respectively) were significantly larger than those of the RT group (1.61 ± 1.04°; 0.67 ± 0.41 mm, respectively) during installation (p < .05). When the installation deviations were analysed in the anterior and premolar areas separately, the angular, platform and apex deviations of the DT group (3.05 ± 3.26°; 0.75 ± 0.32 mm; 1.08 ± 0.56 mm, respectively) were significantly larger than those of the RT group (1.56 ± 0.73°, 0.59 ± 0.28 mm; 0.62 ± 0.38 mm, respectively) in the anterior site (p < .05), whereas there was no significant intergroup difference in the premolar site.

CONCLUSION

In immediate-implant surgery, using an implant with a deeper thread might increase the deviations during installation, especially in the anterior area.