Literature DB >> 22413853

Tolerance within the sleeve inserts of different surgical guides for guided implant surgery.

Richard Koop1, Marjolein Vercruyssen, Kim Vermeulen, Marc Quirynen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Recently, guided implant surgery has been introduced and several studies verified its accuracy. While those studies reported on the accuracy of the entire procedure, this experiment wanted to evaluate the degree of deviation that can occur during the drilling procedure alone, due to the tolerance of the drill in the sleeve insert.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Drilling was executed in a plexi-glass box with a maximal inclination of the drills within the sleeve insert. Different sleeve inserts, sleeve positions, sleeve heights, sleeve insert heights and diameters were evaluated.
RESULTS: The two tested sleeve inserts gave a maximum deviation in angulation of 5.2° and a maximum horizontal deviation of 1.3 mm at the implant shoulder and 2.4 mm at the apex for a 13 mm implant. These deviations decreased if the distance of the sleeve above the plexi-glass box became smaller and hand hold sleeve inserts gave less deviation than drill hold sleeve inserts. The deviation increased by longer implant length, larger drill key diameter, shorter sleeves and/or drill key heights.
CONCLUSIONS: For a minimal deviation during the surgery with a stereolithographic guide, it is very important to use the drill in a centric position, parallel to the cylinder. The use of longer drill keys and sleeves are critical for optimal accuracy.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22413853     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02436.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res        ISSN: 0905-7161            Impact factor:   5.977


  10 in total

1.  Template-guided vs. non-guided drilling in site preparation of dental implants.

Authors:  Uta Scherer; Marcus Stoetzer; Martin Ruecker; Nils-Claudius Gellrich; Constantin von See
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Digital implant planning and guided implant surgery - workflow and reliability.

Authors:  O Schubert; J Schweiger; M Stimmelmayr; E Nold; J-F Güth
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2019-01-25       Impact factor: 1.626

3.  Accuracy of static fully guided implant placement in the posterior area of partially edentulous jaws: a cohort prospective study.

Authors:  Jordi Gargallo-Albiol; María José Zilleruelo-Pozo; Ernest Lucas-Taulé; Jesús Muñoz-Peñalver; Daniel Paternostro-Betancourt; Federico Hernandez-Alfaro
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-11-16       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Clinical and radiological outcomes of novel digital workflow and dynamic navigation for single-implant immediate loading in aesthetic zone: 1-year prospective case series.

Authors:  Alessandro Pozzi; Lorenzo Arcuri; Paolo Carosi; Alessandra Nardi; Joseph Kan
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2021-09-08       Impact factor: 5.021

5.  Accuracy of a direct drill-guiding system with minimal tolerance of surgical instruments used for implant surgery: a prospective clinical study.

Authors:  Du-Hyeong Lee; Seo-Young An; Min-Ho Hong; Kyoung-Bae Jeon; Kyu-Bok Lee
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2016-06-17       Impact factor: 1.904

6.  CAD/CAM implant surgical guides: maximum errors in implant positioning attributable to the properties of the metal sleeve/osteotomy drill combination.

Authors:  Dimitrios Apostolakis; Georgios Kourakis
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2018-11-09

7.  Dynamic Navigation for Zygomatic Implants: A Case Report about a Protocol with Intraoral Anchored Reference Tool and an Up-To-Date Review of the Available Protocols.

Authors:  Gerardo Pellegrino; Giuseppe Lizio; Francesco Basile; Luigi Vito Stefanelli; Claudio Marchetti; Pietro Felice
Journal:  Methods Protoc       Date:  2020-11-05

8.  Multivariate analysis of causal factors influencing accuracy of guided implant surgery for partial edentulism: a retrospective clinical study.

Authors:  Atsushi Matsumura; Tamaki Nakano; Shinji Ono; Akihiro Kaminaka; Hirofumi Yatani; Daijiro Kabata
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-04-19

9.  Comparison of Implant Placement Accuracy in Healed and Fresh Extraction Sockets between Static and Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery Navigation Systems: A Model-Based Evaluation.

Authors:  Miaozhen Wang; Xiaohui Rausch-Fan; Yalin Zhan; Huidan Shen; Feng Liu
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-11       Impact factor: 3.748

10.  Precision and trueness of computer-assisted implant placement using static surgical guides with open and closed sleeves: An in vitro analysis.

Authors:  Arndt Guentsch; Hongseok An; Andrew R Dentino
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2022-02-19       Impact factor: 5.021

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.