Accuracy of 6D computed-derived implant guides made in China for dental implant surgery in edentulous patients

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2020.05.011

Abstract

Abstract: PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of 6D computed-derived implant guides made in China, in order to provide methods and basis for reducing deviation. METHODS: 3D rapid prototyping technique was used to fabricate implant guides for auxiliary surgical implantation in edentulous patients, and the position deviation between the preoperative design and the actual implant was measured. Sixteen edentulous patients with 172 implantation sites were measured. In 10 patients, six implants were implanted in the maxilla, 4 implants in the mandible, and 6 implants were implanted both in the maxilla and mandible of 6 patients. A total of 28 implants were tilted implant in 14 patients. Preoperative cone-beam CT(CBCT) data were imported into the 6D Dental Planning Software to design and make the implant guides. Digital guides were used to assist implant placement. Preoperative design and postoperative CBCT were imported into the software for 3D reconstruction and registration, and then exported to Geomagic Studio software for analysis to obtain the deviation between the preoperative design and the implantation, so as to analyze the accuracy of the guides. The differences were analyzed by SPSS 25.0 software package with paired t-test and single factor analysis of variance. RESULTS: The distance deviation of implant neck center point was (0.83±0.27) mm and the horizontal deviation was (0.60±0.21) mm. The distance deviation of implant bottom center point was (1.11±0.35) mm, and the vertical deviation was (0.45±0.19) mm. The angle deviation was (3.16±1.73)°. CONCLUSIONS: The 6D computed-derived implant guides made in China can improve the accuracy and efficiency of implant surgery for edentulous patients and obtain a better long-term clinical effect to meet clinical requirements well. Since the deviation is similar to other implant guide plate systems that reported aborad, it must be taken into account in the process of clinical design, in order to avoid risks and unnecessary complications. This method is worthy of wide clinical application.

Key words: 6D computed-derived implant guides made in China, Edentulous jaw, Dental implant, Accuracy, Deviation, Cone-beam CT

CLC Number:

R782.1

TU Ye-ying, ZHOU Jian, YU Yan-chun, FAN Ming-xing, PAN Hai-song, LIN Hai-yan. Accuracy of 6D computed-derived implant guides made in China for dental implant surgery in edentulous patients[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2020, 29(5): 504-508.

References

[1] Van de Wiele G, Teughels W, Vercruyssen M, et al. The accuracy of guided surgery via mucosa-supported stereolithographic surgical templates in the hands of surgeons with little experience[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2015, 26(12): 1489-1494.
[2] D'haese J, Ackhurst J, Wismeijer D, et al. Current state of the art of computer-guided implant surgery[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2017, 73(1): 121-133.
[3] Hämmerle CH, Cordaro L, Assche N, et al.Digital technologies to support planning, treatment, and fabrication processes and outcome assessments in implant dentistry. Summary and consensus statements. The 4th EAO consensus conference 2015[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2015, 26(Suppl 11): 97-101.
[4] Jung RE, Schneider D, Ganeles J, et al.Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2009,24(Suppl): 92-109.
[5] Ramasamy M, Giri, Raja R, et al.Implant surgical guides: from the past to the present[J]. J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 2013, 5(Suppl 1): S98-102.
[6] Wismeijer D, Joda T, Flügge T, et al.Group 5 ITI consensus report: digital technologies[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2018, 29(Suppl 16):436-442.
[7] Turbush SK, Turkyilmaz I.Accuracy of three different types of stereolithographic surgical guide in implant placement: an in vitro study[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2012, 108(3): 181-188.
[8] Arisan V, Karabuda ZC, Piskin B, et al.Conventional multislice computed tomography (CT) and cone-beam CT (CBCT) for computer-aided implant placement. Part Ⅱ: reliability of mucosa-supported stereolithographic guides[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2013, 15(6): 907-917.
[9] Cristache CM, Gurbanescu S.Accuracy evaluation of a stereolithographic surgical template for dental implant insertion using 3D superimposition protocol[J]. Int J Dent, 2017, 2017: 492081.
[10] Ozan O, Turkyilmaz I, Ersoy AE, et al.Clinical accuracy of 3 different types of computed tomography-derived stereolitho graphic surgical guides in implant placement[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2009, 67(2): 394-401.
[11] Ersoy AE, Turkyilmaz I, Ozan O, et al.Reliability of implant placement with stereolithographic surgical guides generated from computed tomography: clinical data from 94 implants[J]. J Periodontol, 2008, 79(8): 1339-1345.
[12] 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]. J Periodontol, 2010, 81(1):43-51.
[13] D’haese J, Van De Velde T, Komiyama A, et al. Accuracy and complications using computer-designed stereolithographic surgical guides for oral rehabilitation by means of dental implants: a review of the literature[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2012, 14(3): 321-335.
[14] Cassetta M, Stefanelli LV, Giansanti M, et al.Accuracy of implant placement with a stereolithographic surgical template[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2012, 27(3): 655-663.
[15] Rungcharassaeng K, Caruso JM, Kan JY, et al.Accuracy of computer-guided surgery: a comparison of operator experience[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2015, 114(3):407-413.