The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

An assessment of template-guided implant surgery in terms of accuracy and related factors

  • Lee, Jee-Ho (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul Asan Medical Center) ;
  • Park, Ji-Man (Department of Prosthodontics, Ewha Womans University, School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Soung-Min (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Dental Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Myung-Joo (Department of Prosthodontics, Seoul National University Dental Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Jong-Ho (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Dental Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Myung-Jin (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Seoul National University Dental Hospital)
  • Received : 2013.05.07
  • Accepted : 2013.10.21
  • Published : 2013.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. Template-guided implant therapy has developed hand-in-hand with computed tomography (CT) to improve the accuracy of implant surgery and future prosthodontic treatment. In our present study, the accuracy and causative factors for computer-assisted implant surgery were assessed to further validate the stable clinical application of this technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A total of 102 implants in 48 patients were included in this study. Implant surgery was performed with a stereolithographic template. Pre- and post-operative CTs were used to compare the planned and placed implants. Accuracy and related factors were statistically analyzed with the Spearman correlation method and the linear mixed model. Differences were considered to be statistically significant at $P{\leq}.05$. RESULTS. The mean errors of computer-assisted implant surgery were 1.09 mm at the coronal center, 1.56 mm at the apical center, and the axis deviation was $3.80^{\circ}$. The coronal and apical errors of the implants were found to be strongly correlated. The errors developed at the coronal center were magnified at the apical center by the fixture length. The case of anterior edentulous area and longer fixtures affected the accuracy of the implant template. CONCLUSION. The control of errors at the coronal center and stabilization of the anterior part of the template are needed for safe implant surgery and future prosthodontic treatment.

Keywords

References

  1. Besimo C, Lambrecht JT, Nidecker A. Dental implant treatment planning with reformatted computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1995;24:264-7.
  2. Fortin T, Coudert JL, Champleboux G, Sautot P, Lavallee S. Computer-assisted dental implant surgery using computed tomography. J Image Guid Surg 1995;1:53-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-712X(1995)1:1<53::AID-IGS8>3.0.CO;2-L
  3. Jacobs R, Adriansens A, Naert I, Quirynen M, Hermans R, Van Steenberghe D. Predictability of reformatted computed tomography for pre-operative planning of endosseous implants. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999;28:37-41. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600403
  4. Fortin T, Champleboux G, Bianchi S, Buatois H, Coudert JL. Precision of transfer of preoperative planning for oral implants based on cone-beam CT-scan images through a robotic drilling machine. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:651-6. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130612.x
  5. Ozan O, Turkyilmaz I, Ersoy AE, McGlumphy EA, Rosenstiel SF. Clinical accuracy of 3 different types of computed tomography-derived stereolithographic surgical guides in implant placement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:394- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.09.033
  6. Jacobs R, Adriansens A, Verstreken K, Suetens P, van Steenberghe D. Predictability of a three-dimensional planning system for oral implant surgery. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999; 28:105-11. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600419
  7. Arisan V, Karabuda ZC, Ozdemir T. Accuracy of two stereolithographic guide systems for computer-aided implant placement: a computed tomography-based clinical comparative study. J Periodontol 2010;81:43-51. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2009.090348
  8. Cassetta M, Di Mambro A, Giansanti M, Stefanelli LV, Cavallini C. The intrinsic error of a stereolithographic surgical template in implant guided surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013;42:264-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2012.06.010
  9. D'haese J, Van De Velde T, Elaut L, De Bruyn H. A prospective study on the accuracy of mucosally supported stereolithographic surgical guides in fully edentulous maxillae. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:293-303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00255.x
  10. Park C, Raigrodski AJ, Rosen J, Spiekerman C, London RM. Accuracy of implant placement using precision surgical guides with varying occlusogingival heights: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2009;101:372-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60080-9
  11. Stumpel LJ. Deformation of stereolithographically produced surgical guides: an observational case series report. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:442-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00268.x
  12. Valente F, Schiroli G, Sbrenna A. Accuracy of computer-aided oral implant surgery: a clinical and radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:234-42.
  13. Vercruyssen M, Jacobs R, Van Assche N, van Steenberghe D. The use of CT scan based planning for oral rehabilitation by means of implants and its transfer to the surgical field: a critical review on accuracy. J Oral Rehabil 2008;35:454-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01816.x
  14. Di Giacomo GA, Cury PR, de Araujo NS, Sendyk WR, Sendyk CL. Clinical application of stereolithographic surgical guides for implant placement: preliminary results. J Periodontol 2005;76:503-7. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2005.76.4.503
  15. Vrielinck L, Politis C, Schepers S, Pauwels M, Naert I. Imagebased planning and clinical validation of zygoma and pterygoid implant placement in patients with severe bone atrophy using customized drill guides. Preliminary results from a prospective clinical follow-up study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;32:7-14. https://doi.org/10.1054/ijom.2002.0337
  16. Lee JH, Kim MJ, Kim SM, Kwon OH, Kim YK. The 3D CT superimposition method using image fusion based on the maximum mutual information algorithm for the assessment of oral and maxillofacial surgery treatment results. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012;114:167-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2011.06.003
  17. Verstreken K, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Marchal G, Naert I, Suetens P, van Steenberghe D. Computer-assisted planning of oral implant surgery: a three-dimensional approach. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:806-10.
  18. Fortin T, Camby E, Alik M, Isidori M, Bouchet H. Panoramic images versus three-dimensional planning software for oral implant planning in atrophied posterior maxillary: a clinical radiological study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013;15:198- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00342.x
  19. Cassetta M, Stefanelli LV, Giansanti M, Calasso S. Accuracy of implant placement with a stereolithographic surgical template. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012;27:655-63.
  20. Sarment DP, Sukovic P, Clinthorne N. Accuracy of implant placement with a stereolithographic surgical guide. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:571-7.
  21. Kramer FJ, Baethge C, Swennen G, Rosahl S. Navigated vs. conventional implant insertion for maxillary single tooth replacement. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:60-8.
  22. Choi M, Romberg E, Driscoll CF. Effects of varied dimensions of surgical guides on implant angulations. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:463-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.08.010
  23. Schneider D, Marquardt P, Zwahlen M, Jung RE. A systematic review on the accuracy and the clinical outcome of computer- guided template-based implant dentistry. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:73-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01788.x
  24. Van Assche N, Vercruyssen M, Coucke W, Teughels W, Jacobs R, Quirynen M. Accuracy of computer-aided implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:112-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02552.x

Cited by

  1. A survey of the satisfaction of patients who have undergone implant surgery with and without employing a computer-guided implant surgical template vol.6, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.5.395
  2. Accuracy comparison of guided surgery for dental implants according to the tissue of support: a systematic review and meta-analysis vol.28, pp.5, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12841
  3. Accuracy of a direct drill-guiding system with minimal tolerance of surgical instruments used for implant surgery: a prospective clinical study vol.8, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2016.8.3.207
  4. The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis vol.29, pp.09057161, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13346
  5. Use of three points to determine the accuracy of guided implantation vol.14, pp.12, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225823
  6. 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 vol.14, pp.14, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14144023
  7. Comparison of Dental Surface Image Registration and Fiducial Marker Registration: An In Vivo Accuracy Study of Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery vol.10, pp.18, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10184183
  8. Assessment of the reproducibility and precision of milling and 3D printing surgical guides vol.21, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-020-01362-6
  9. Multivariate analysis of causal factors influencing accuracy of guided implant surgery for partial edentulism: a retrospective clinical study vol.7, pp.1, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-021-00313-2