Literature DB >> 33572781

In Vitro Comparison between Metal Sleeve-Free and Metal Sleeve-Incorporated 3D-Printed Computer-Assisted Implant Surgical Guides.

Kyung Chul Oh1, June-Sung Shim1, Ji-Man Park1.   

Abstract

The present study aims to compare the accuracy of metal sleeve-free 3D-printed computer-assisted implant surgical guides (MSF group) (n = 10) with metal sleeve-incorporated 3D-printed computer-assisted implant surgical guides (MSI group) (n = 10). Implants of diameter 4.0 mm and 5.0 mm were placed in the left second premolars and bilateral first molars, respectively, using a fully guided system. Closed-form sleeves were used in teeth on the left and open-form sleeves on the right. The weight differences of the surgical guides before and after implant placement, and angular deviations before and after implant placement were measured. Weight differences were compared with Student's t-tests and angular deviations with Mann-Whitney tests. Cross-sectional views of the insert parts were observed with a scanning electron microscope. Preoperative and postoperative weight differences between the two groups were not statistically significant (p = 0.821). In terms of angular deviations, those along the mesiodistal direction for the left second premolars were significantly lower in the MSF group (p = 0.006). However, those along the mesiodistal direction for the bilateral molars and those along the buccolingual direction for all teeth were not significantly different (p > 0.05). 3D-printed implant surgical guides without metal sleeve inserts enable accurate implant placement without exhausting the guide holes, rendering them feasible for fully guided implant placement.

Entities:  

Keywords:  additive manufacturing; angular deviation; computer-assisted implant surgical guide; fully guided implant placement; metal sleeve-free implant surgical guide; metal sleeve-incorporated surgical guide

Year:  2021        PMID: 33572781      PMCID: PMC7866124          DOI: 10.3390/ma14030615

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Materials (Basel)        ISSN: 1996-1944            Impact factor:   3.623


  30 in total

Review 1.  Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) imaging of the oral and maxillofacial region: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  W De Vos; J Casselman; G R J Swennen
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2009-05-21       Impact factor: 2.789

2.  Accuracy of virtually planned and CAD/CAM-guided implant surgery on plastic models.

Authors:  Andreas Pettersson; Timo Kero; Rikard Söderberg; Karin Näsström
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  2014-06-30       Impact factor: 3.426

3.  Microbial contamination and the sterilization/disinfection of surgical guides used in the placement of endosteal implants.

Authors:  Peter N Smith; Charles John Palenik; Steven B Blanchard
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  2011 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.804

4.  Deviations of different systems for guided implant surgery.

Authors:  V Laederach; K Mukaddam; M Payer; A Filippi; S Kühl
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 5.977

5.  In Vivo Tooth-Supported Implant Surgical Guides Fabricated With Desktop Stereolithographic Printers: Fully Guided Surgery Is More Accurate Than Partially Guided Surgery.

Authors:  Sompop Bencharit; Adam Staffen; Matthew Yeung; Daniel Whitley; Daniel M Laskin; George R Deeb
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 1.895

6.  Guidance means accuracy: A randomized clinical trial on freehand versus guided dental implantation.

Authors:  Endre Varga; Márk Antal; László Major; Ramóna Kiscsatári; Gábor Braunitzer; Jozsef Piffkó
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2020-01-31       Impact factor: 5.977

7.  Split-mouth comparison of the accuracy of computer-generated and conventional surgical guides.

Authors:  Nathaniel E Farley; Kelly Kennedy; Edwin A McGlumphy; Nancy L Clelland
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 8.  Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ali Tahmaseb; Daniel Wismeijer; Wim Coucke; Wiebe Derksen
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 2.804

9.  Pilot-drill guided vs. full-guided implant insertion in artificial mandibles-a prospective laboratory study in fifth-year dental students.

Authors:  Matthias C Schulz; Francisca Hofmann; Ursula Range; Günter Lauer; Dominik Haim
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2019-06-26
View more
  1 in total

1.  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

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.