Research of implant accuracy using a digital registration method

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2023.03.013

Abstract

Abstract: PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to introduce a new method to evaluate the clinical accuracy of implant position. The results were compared to traditional cone beam CT (CBCT) method. METHODS: A total of 36 implants from 24 patients with sufficient bone volume were enrolled into the study. CBCT method and digital registration method were compared to evaluate the accuracy of implant position. The measurement parameters were defined as deviations between ideal and postsurgical implant position at occlusal point(d1), apical point(d2) and axis(α). The deviations between two methods were analyzed with SPSS 19.0 software package. RESULTS: The deviations between ideal and postsurgical implant position using CBCT were (0.88±0.64) mm for occlusal point, (1.07±0.85) mm for apical point and (4.74±2.35)° for angle. In digital registration method, the deviations were (0.86±0.67) mm for occlusal point, (1.12±0.88) mm for apical point and (4.56±2.66)° for angle. No significant difference(P>0.05) was found between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference between the two methods in evaluating the clinical accuracy of implant position. Digital registration method could be accepted in clinical application.

Key words: Accuracy, Implant position, Digital registration

CLC Number:

R782.1

LIAN Mei-fei, ZHANG Xiu-yin, TANG Tian-hong, XIN Xian-zhen. Research of implant accuracy using a digital registration method[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2023, 32(3): 287-291.

References

[1] 林野. 我国口腔种植学的发展现状与思考[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2007, 42(11): 641-645.
[2] Hultin M, Svensson KG, Trulsson M.Clinical advantages of computer-guided implant placement: a systematic review[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2012, 23(Suppl 6): 124-135.
[3] Kühl S, Zürcher S, Mahid T, et al.Accuracy of full guided vs. half-guided implant surgery[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2013, 24(7): 763-769.
[4] 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.
[5] Shaheen E, Khalil W, Ezeldeen M, et al.Accuracy of segmentation of tooth structures using 3 different CBCT machines[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol, 2017, 123(1): 123-128.
[6] Koong B.Cone beam imaging: is this the ultimate imaging modality?[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2010, 21(11): 1201-1208.
[7] Schnutenhaus S, Edelmann C, Rudolph H, et al.Retrospective study to determine the accuracy of template-guided implant placement using a novel nonradiologic evaluation method[J]. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol, 2016, 121(4): e72-e79
[8] Platzer S, Bertha G, Heschl A, et al.Three-dimensional accuracy of guided implant placement: indirect assessment of clinical outcomes[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2013, 15(5): 724-734.
[9] Komiyama A, Pettersson A, Hultin M, et al.Virtually planned and template-guided implant surgery: an experimental model matching approach[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2011, 22(3): 308-313.
[10] Almhdie A, Léger C, Deriche M, et al.3D registration using a new implementation of the ICP algorithm based on a comprehensive lookup matrix: application to medical imaging[J]. Pattern Recognit Lett, 2007, 28(12): 1523-1533.
[11] Liang X, Lambrichts I, Sun Y, et al.A comparative evaluation of cone beam computed tomography(CBCT) and multi-slice CT (MSCT). part Ⅱ: on 3D model accuracy[J]. Eur J Radiol, 2010, 75(2): 270-274.
[12] Jung W, Park S, Shin H. Combining volumetric dental CT and optical scan data for teeth modeling[J]. Comput Aided Des, 2015, 67-68: 24-37.
[13] 陈小平, 黄慧. 数字化印模准确度的研究现状[J]. 口腔材料器械杂志, 2018, 27(2): 98-100.
[14] Shen P, Zhao J, Fan L, et al.Accuracy evaluation of computer-designed surgical guide template in oral implantology[J]. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2015, 43(10): 2189-2194.
[15] Wang D, Künzel A, Golubovic V, et al.Accuracy of peri-implant bone thickness and validity of assessing bone augmentation material using cone beam computed tomography[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2013, 17(6): 1601-1609.
[16] Flügge T, Derksen W, Te Poel J, et al.Registration of cone beam computed tomography data and intraoral surface scans - a prerequisite for guided implant surgery with CAD/CAM drilling guides[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2017, 28(9): 1113-1118.
[17] Amin S, Weber HP, Finkelman M, et al.Digital vs. conventional full-arch implant impressions: a comparative study[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2017, 28(11): 1360-1367.