• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.58 no.9
• /
• pp.583-589
• /
• 2020

If the implant is planted in the wrong position or direction, it is disadvantageous for stress distribution, and it is easy to cause complications such as screw loosening, abutment fracture, and implant fracture. If the position or orientation of the implant is not good, efforts should be made to minimize the problem through proper implant prosthetic treatment. In this article, the prosthetic method for facilitating future maintenance in cases with poor implant placement or orientation will be presented.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.51 no.11
• /
• pp.586-594
• /
• 2013

The critical factors affecting the esthetics of anterior implants can be summarized as following: 1) Correct positioning of implant fixture 2) Enough amount of alveolar bone 3) Optimum volume of soft tissue. The position of implant is probably the most important factor in obtaining esthetic treatment outcome. The 3-dimensional orientation of implant is determined by the position on the alveolar ridge and its direction. Clinicians often try to mimic natural teeth when fabricating restorations. During the course of esthetic diagnosis and treatment, however, one should not forget to consider the correlation between facial pattern, lips, gingiva, alveolar ridge, as well as remaining dentition. Since anterior region is biologically unfavorable when compared with posterior region, one minor discrepancy in positioning of implant can cause esthetically undesirable treatment outcome. If one understands the biological and prosthetic meaning of implant's 3-dimensional position, he or she can achieve superior esthetic outcome in anterior region.

• Journal of the Korean Academy of Esthetic Dentistry
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.39-48
• /
• 2015

The critical factors affecting the esthetics of anterior implants can be summarized as following: 1) Correct positioning of implant fixture, 2) Enough amount of alveolar bone, 3) Optimum volume of soft tissue. The position of implant is probably the most important factor in obtaining esthetic treatment outcome. The 3-dimensional orientation of implant is determined by the position on the alveolar ridge and its direction. Clinicians often try to mimic natural teeth when fabricating restorations. During the course of esthetic diagnosis and treatment, however, one should not forget to consider the correlation between facial pattern, lips, gingiva, alveolar ridge, as well as remaining dentition. Since anterior region is biologically unfavorable when compared with posterior region, one minor discrepancy in positioning of implant can cause esthetically undesirable treatment outcome. If one understands the biological and prosthetic meaning of implant' s 3-dimensional position, he or she can achieve superior esthetic outcome in anterior region.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.107-113
• /
• 2020

PURPOSE. The aim of this study was to examine the importance of the defect-free scanning of a scan body by assessing the accuracy of virtual implant positioning in computer-aided design (CAD) software when the scan body image is improperly scanned. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A scan body was digitized in a dentiform model using an intraoral scanner, and scanned images with differing levels of image deficiency were generated: 5%, 10%, and 15% deficiency in the flat or rounded area. Using a best-fit image matching algorithm on each of the deficient scan body images, corresponding virtual implants were created. The accuracy of the implant position was evaluated by comparing the linear and angular discrepancies between the actual and virtual positions of the implant. Kruskal-Wallis tests and Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction were used to determine the statistical differences among the seven scanned image deficiency groups (α=.05). RESULTS. In general, the linear and angular discrepancies of the implant position in the software increased as the deficiency of the scan body images increased. A 15% scan body image deficiency generated larger discrepancies than deficiency of 5% and 10%. The difference of scan defect position, flat or rounded area, did not affect the accuracy of virtual implant orientation at 5% and 10% deficiency level, but did affect the accuracy at 15% deficiency level. CONCLUSION. Deficiencies in the scanned images of a scan body can decrease the accuracy of the implant positioning in CAD software when the defect is large, thus leading to the incorrect fabrication of implant prostheses.

• Imaging Science in Dentistry
• /
• v.45 no.2
• /
• pp.73-80
• /
• 2015

Purpose: This study evaluated the effect of various head orientations during cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image acquisition on linear measurements of potential implant sites. Materials and Methods: Six dry human skulls with a total of 28 implant sites were evaluated for seven different head orientations. The scans were acquired using a Hitachi CB-MercuRay CBCT machine. The scanned volumes were reconstructed. Horizontal and vertical measurements were made and were compared to measurements made after simulating the head position to corrected head angulations. Data was analyzed using a two-way ANOVA test. Results: Statistical analysis revealed a significant interaction between the mean errors in vertical measurements with a marked difference observed at the extension head position (P<0.05). Statistical analysis failed to yield any significant interaction between the mean errors in horizontal measurements at various head positions. Conclusion: Head orientation could significantly affect the vertical measurements in CBCT scans. The main head position influencing the measurements is extension.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.117-125
• /
• 2023

Background: Preoperative traditional software planning (TSP) is a method used to assist surgeons with implant selection and glenoid guide-pin insertion in shoulder arthroplasty. Mixed reality (MR) is a new technology that uses digital holograms of the preoperative plan and guide-pin trajectory projected into the operative field. The purpose of this study was to compare TSP to MR in a simulated surgical environment involving insertion of guide-pins into models of severely deformed glenoids. Methods: Eight surgeons inserted guide-pins into eight randomized three-dimensional-printed severely eroded glenoid models in a simulated surgical environment using either TSP or MR. In total, 128 glenoid models were used and statistically compared. The outcomes compared between techniques included procedural time, difference in guide-pin start point, difference in version and inclination, and surgeon confidence via a confidence rating scale. Results: When comparing traditional preoperative software planning to MR visualization as techniques to assist surgeons in glenoid guide pin insertion, there were no statistically significant differences in terms of mean procedure time (P=0.634), glenoid start-point (TSP=2.2±0.2 mm, MR=2.1±0.1 mm; P=0.760), guide-pin orientation (P=0.586), or confidence rating score (P=0.850). Conclusions: The results demonstrate that there were no significant differences between traditional preoperative software planning and MR visualization for guide-pin placement into models of eroded glenoids. A perceived benefit of MR is the real-time intraoperative visibility of the surgical plan and the patient's anatomy; however, this did not translate into decreased procedural time or improved guide-pin position.