A comparison of accuracy among different approaches of static-guided implant placement in patients treated with mandibular reconstruction: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the differences in the accuracy of immediate intraoral, immediate extraoral, and delayed dental implant placement with surgical guides (static computer-aided implant surgery) in patients treated with mandibular reconstruction.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study. The patients were divided into three groups: immediate intraoral placement (IIO), immediate extraoral placement (IEO), and delayed placement (DEL). Four variables were used to compare the planned and actual implant positions: angular deviation, three-dimensional (3D) deviation at the entry point of the implant, 3D deviation at the apical point of the implant, and depth deviation.

RESULTS

The angular deviation was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .05) and DEL (p < .05) groups. The 3D deviation at the entry point was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .05) and DEL (p < .01) groups. The 3D deviation at the apical point was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .01) and DEL (p < .01) groups. The depth deviation was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .05) and DEL (p < .05) groups. There was no statistical difference between the IEO and DEL group in angular and 3D deviation.

CONCLUSION

With surgical guides, among the different approaches for implant placement, delayed implant placement remains the most accurate approach for patients treated with mandibular reconstruction.

Survival of Dental Implants Placed in Iliac, Fibula, and Radial Forearm Flaps: A Comprehensive Review

Various donor sites have been extensively documented in the literature for bone free flaps in head and neck reconstruction. These include the radius, scapula, rib, ilium, femur, fibula, and metatarsal bone. Among them, the fibula, ilium, and scapula are the most commonly used and studied for placing endosseous implants and for rehabilitation purposes. Each donor site has its own advantages and disadvantages, which depend on factors such as whether the reconstruction is for the maxilla or mandible, the required volume and length of the bone and soft tissue, and the location, extent, and type of defect that needs to be reconstructed. The aim of this current review is to comprehensively assess the existing literature on the survival of implants in fibula, radial, and iliac flaps.