Sigmar Schnutenhaus1,2, Cornelia Edelmann3, Heike Rudolph4. 1. Zentrum für Zahnmedizin Dr. Schnutenhaus MVZ GmbH [Center for Dentistry, Dr. Schnutenhaus Community Health Center (CHC) GmbH], Breiter Wasmen 10, 78247, Hilzingen, Germany. info@schnutenhaus.de. 2. Clinic for Dental Prosthetics, Center for Dental, Oral and Maxillofacial, Ulm University, Albert-Einstein-Allee 11, 89081, Ulm, Germany. info@schnutenhaus.de. 3. Zentrum für Zahnmedizin Dr. Schnutenhaus MVZ GmbH [Center for Dentistry, Dr. Schnutenhaus Community Health Center (CHC) GmbH], Breiter Wasmen 10, 78247, Hilzingen, Germany. 4. Clinic for Dental Prosthetics, Center for Dental, Oral and Maxillofacial, Ulm University, Albert-Einstein-Allee 11, 89081, Ulm, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An implant prosthesis aims to ensure the best possible rehabilitation of function and esthetics following tooth loss. Template-guided insertion is used to achieve an optimal position of the implant with regard to prosthetic restorability, bone availability, and condition of the surrounding soft tissues. The accuracy of template-guided implant placement is subject to various influencing factors. The clinically achievable accuracy depending on the macro design of the implant body was investigated in this prospective clinical study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this prospective clinical study, 20 implants were placed in 20 patients. The implant had a pronounced conical outer geometry (Conelog ProgressiveLine, Camlog Wimsheim, Germany). Data from a study using an implant with a distinct cylindrical outer geometry were used as a comparison group (Conelog ScrewLine, Camlog, Wimsheim, Germany). The clinically achieved implant position was compared with the planned position. RESULTS: The evaluation of the two-dimensional deviations in direction resulted in the following mean values (standard deviation) at the shoulder: 0.42 mm (0.33) in the buccolingual direction, 0.27 mm (0.25) in the mesiodistal direction, and 0.68 mm (0.55) in the apicocoronal direction. The mean angular deviation was 4.1° (2.3). The three-dimensional (3D) deviation was 0.94 mm (0.53) at the shoulder and 1.36 mm (0.62) at the apex of the implant. Significant differences between implants with different macro designs were found in the apicocoronal direction. In connection to this, a significant 3D deviation was found at the implant shoulder. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in height were found between the groups. The study had shown that the macro design of an implant has no influence on accuracy in all other directions. Overall, the implants showed a high level of accuracy and a low variation in values. The values were in the range determined by the template-guided insertion system in numerous other investigations. This provides good predictability of prosthetic rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Register for Clinical Studies (DRKS-ID: DRKS000018939 ). Date of registration: November 11, 2019.
BACKGROUND: An implant prosthesis aims to ensure the best possible rehabilitation of function and esthetics following tooth loss. Template-guided insertion is used to achieve an optimal position of the implant with regard to prosthetic restorability, bone availability, and condition of the surrounding soft tissues. The accuracy of template-guided implant placement is subject to various influencing factors. The clinically achievable accuracy depending on the macro design of the implant body was investigated in this prospective clinical study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this prospective clinical study, 20 implants were placed in 20 patients. The implant had a pronounced conical outer geometry (Conelog ProgressiveLine, Camlog Wimsheim, Germany). Data from a study using an implant with a distinct cylindrical outer geometry were used as a comparison group (Conelog ScrewLine, Camlog, Wimsheim, Germany). The clinically achieved implant position was compared with the planned position. RESULTS: The evaluation of the two-dimensional deviations in direction resulted in the following mean values (standard deviation) at the shoulder: 0.42 mm (0.33) in the buccolingual direction, 0.27 mm (0.25) in the mesiodistal direction, and 0.68 mm (0.55) in the apicocoronal direction. The mean angular deviation was 4.1° (2.3). The three-dimensional (3D) deviation was 0.94 mm (0.53) at the shoulder and 1.36 mm (0.62) at the apex of the implant. Significant differences between implants with different macro designs were found in the apicocoronal direction. In connection to this, a significant 3D deviation was found at the implant shoulder. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in height were found between the groups. The study had shown that the macro design of an implant has no influence on accuracy in all other directions. Overall, the implants showed a high level of accuracy and a low variation in values. The values were in the range determined by the template-guided insertion system in numerous other investigations. This provides good predictability of prosthetic rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Register for Clinical Studies (DRKS-ID: DRKS000018939 ). Date of registration: November 11, 2019.
Authors: Luigi V Stefanelli; George A Mandelaris; Bradley S DeGroot; Gianluca Gambarini; Francesca De Angelis; Stefano Di Carlo Journal: Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent Date: 2020 May/Jun Impact factor: 1.840
Authors: Faris Younes; Jan Cosyn; Thomas De Bruyckere; Roberto Cleymaet; Eline Bouckaert; Aryan Eghbali Journal: J Clin Periodontol Date: 2018-05-10 Impact factor: 8.728
Authors: Xiaotong Wang; Eman Shaheen; Sohaib Shujaat; Jan Meeus; Paul Legrand; Pierre Lahoud; Maurício do Nascimento Gerhardt; Constantinus Politis; Reinhilde Jacobs Journal: Int J Implant Dent Date: 2022-10-10