Rani D'haese1, Tom Vrombaut1, Geert Hommez1, Hugo De Bruyn1,2, Stefan Vandeweghe1. 1. Oral Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium. 2. Dental Faculty, Radboud University Medical Hospital, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this in vitro study is to evaluate the accuracy of implant position using mucosal supported surgical guides, produced by a desktop 3D printer. METHODS: Ninety implants (Bone Level Roxolid, 4.1 mm × 10 mm, Straumann, Villerat, Switzerland) were placed in fifteen mandibular casts (Bonemodels, Castellón de la Plana, Spain). A mucosa-supported guide was designed and printed for each of the fifteen casts. After placement of the implants, the location was assessed by scanning the cast and scan bodies with an intra-oral scanner (Primescan®, Dentsply Sirona, York, PA, USA). Two comparisons were performed: one with the mucosa as a reference, and one where only the implants were aligned. Angular, coronal and apical deviations were measured. RESULTS: The mean implant angular deviation for tissue and implant alignment were 3.25° (SD 1.69°) and 2.39° (SD 1.42°) respectively, the coronal deviation 0.82 mm (SD 0.43 mm) and 0.45 mm (SD 0.31 mm) and the apical deviation 0.99 mm (SD 0.45 mm) and 0.71 mm (SD 0.43 mm). All three variables were significantly different between the tissue and implant alignment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Based on the results of this study, we conclude that guided implant surgery using desktop 3D printed mucosa-supported guides has a clinically acceptable level of accuracy. The resilience of the mucosa has a negative effect on the guide stability and increases the deviation in implant position.
PURPOSE: The aim of this in vitro study is to evaluate the accuracy of implant position using mucosal supported surgical guides, produced by a desktop 3D printer. METHODS: Ninety implants (Bone Level Roxolid, 4.1 mm × 10 mm, Straumann, Villerat, Switzerland) were placed in fifteen mandibular casts (Bonemodels, Castellón de la Plana, Spain). A mucosa-supported guide was designed and printed for each of the fifteen casts. After placement of the implants, the location was assessed by scanning the cast and scan bodies with an intra-oral scanner (Primescan®, Dentsply Sirona, York, PA, USA). Two comparisons were performed: one with the mucosa as a reference, and one where only the implants were aligned. Angular, coronal and apical deviations were measured. RESULTS: The mean implant angular deviation for tissue and implant alignment were 3.25° (SD 1.69°) and 2.39° (SD 1.42°) respectively, the coronal deviation 0.82 mm (SD 0.43 mm) and 0.45 mm (SD 0.31 mm) and the apical deviation 0.99 mm (SD 0.45 mm) and 0.71 mm (SD 0.43 mm). All three variables were significantly different between the tissue and implant alignment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Based on the results of this study, we conclude that guided implant surgery using desktop 3D printed mucosa-supported guides has a clinically acceptable level of accuracy. The resilience of the mucosa has a negative effect on the guide stability and increases the deviation in implant position.
Authors: Andreas Pettersson; Ai Komiyama; Margareta Hultin; Karin Näsström; Björn Klinge Journal: Clin Implant Dent Relat Res Date: 2010-05-11 Impact factor: 3.932
Authors: Luc M Verhamme; Gert J Meijer; Tiny Boumans; Filip Schutyser; Stefaan J Bergé; Thomas J J Maal Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2012-08-20 Impact factor: 5.977
Authors: Olivier de Waard; Frits Andreas Rangel; Piotr Stanislaw Fudalej; Ewald Maria Bronkhorst; Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman; Karel Hero Breuning Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 2.650