Abstract
Introduction
Dental implants have been used in a variety of conventional technique-based forms for many years which had its own drawbacks. With the advent of cone beam CT, proper surgical and prosthetic planning is possible now a days. To achieve ideal implant placement, good prosthetic fabrication and overall successful prognosis computer fabricated guide aided surgery have been developed.
Aim and Objective
The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the accuracy of implant placement in partially edentulous patients with conventional free hand technique and computer fabricated guide of implant placement by comparing pre- and post-CBCT data.
Methods
The present split mouth study design was conducted with forty sample size on twenty randomly selected patients who were treated with bilateral partially edentulous sites requiring dental implants. Patients were treated with both conventional (free hand) technique and computer fabricated 3D guide aided technique of implant placement. Comparison of accuracy of implant placement was done by comparing the pre- and postoperative CBCT data in terms of mean coronal deviation, mean apical deviation and mean angular deviation.
Results and Conclusion
The results showed that there is no statistically significant difference between mean coronal deviation, mean apical deviation and mean angular deviation of planned and placed implants in both conventional technique (free hand technique) and computer fabricated 3D guide aided implant placement technique. Hence, this study concluded that conventional technique of implant placement is equally efficient in comparison with computer fabricated guide aided surgery in terms of accuracy of implant placement.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Tallarico M, Scrascia R, Annucci M, Meloni SM, Lumbau AI, Koshovari A, Xhanari E, Martinolli M (2020) Errors in implant positioning due to lack of planning: a clinical case report of new prosthetic materials and solutions. Materials 13(8):1883
Gupta J, Ali SP (2013) Cone beam computed tomography in oral implants. Natl J Maxillofac Surg 4(1):2
Nickenig HJ, Wichmann M, Hamel J, Schlegel KA, Eitner S (2010) Evaluation of the difference in accuracy between implant placement by virtual planning data and surgical guide templates versus the conventional free-hand method—a combined in vivo–in vitro technique using cone-beam CT (Part II). J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg 38(7):488–493
Vermeulen J (2017) The accuracy of implant placement by experienced surgeons: guided vs freehand approach in a simulated plastic model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 32(3):617–624
Arısan V, Karabuda CZ, Mumcu E, Özdemir T (2013) Implant positioning errors in freehand and computer-aided placement methods: a single-blind clinical comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 28(1):190–204
Alevizakos V, Mitov G, Stoetzer M, von See C (2019) A retrospective study of the accuracy of template-guided versus freehand implant placement: a nonradiologic method. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 128(3):220–226
Payer M, Kirmeier R, Jakse N, Pertl C, Wegscheider W, Lorenzoni M (2008) Surgical factors influencing mesiodistal implant angulation. Clin Oral Implant Res 19(3):265–270
Cho UH, Yu W, Kyung HM (2010) Root contact during drilling for microimplant placement: effect of surgery site and operator expertise. Angle Orthod 80:130–136
Lambert PM, Morris HF, Ochi S (1997) Positive effect of surgical experience with implants on second-stage implant survival. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 55:12–18
Van de Velde T, Glor F, De Bruyn H (2008) A model study on flapless implant placement by clinicians with a different experience level in implant surgery. Clin Oral Implants Res 19:66–72
Kohavi D, Azran G, Shapira L, Casap N (2004) Retrospective clinical review of dental implants placed in a university training program. J Oral Implantol 30:23–29
Cristache CM, Gurbanescu S (2017) Accuracy evaluation of a stereolithographic surgical template for dental implant insertion using 3D superimposition protocol. Int J Dent. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/4292081
Block MS, Emery RW (2016) Static or dynamic navigation for implant placement choosing the method of guidance. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 74(2):269–277
Mai HN, Lee DH (2020) Effects of supporting conditions and anchor microscrew on the stabilization of the implant guide template during the drilling process: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 124(6):727-e1
Pozzi A, Tallarico M, Marchetti M, Scarfò B, Esposito M (2014) Computerguided versus free-hand placement of immediately loaded dental implants: 1-year post-loading results of a multicentre randomized controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol 7(3):229–42
Vercruyssen M, Van de Wiele G, Teughels W, Naert I, Jacobs R, Quirynen M (2014) Implant-and patient-centred outcomes of guided surgery, a 1-year follow-up: an RCT comparing guided surgery with conventional implant placement. J Clin Period Ontol 41(12):1154–1160
Colombo M, Mangano C, Mijiritsky E, Krebs M, Hauschild U, Fortin T (2017) Clinical applications and effectiveness of guided implant surgery: a critical review based on randomized controlled trials. BMC Oral Health 17(1):1–9
Cunha RM, Souza FÁ, Hadad H, Poli PP, Maiorana C, Carvalho PSP (2021) Accuracy evaluation of computer-guided implant surgery associated with prototyped surgical guides. J Prosthet Dent 125(2):266–272
Filius MA, Kraeima J, Vissink A, Janssen KI, Raghoebar GM, Visser A (2017) Three-dimensional computer-guided implant placement in oligodontia. Int J Implant Dent 3(1):1–8
Zhou W, Liu Z, Song L, Kuo CL, Shafer DM (2018) Clinical factors affecting the accuracy of guided implant surgery—a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Evid Based Dental Pract 18(1):28–40
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
The ethical clearance for conducting the study was obtained from ethical committee of the institution.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Verma, N., Kamboj, G., Lata, J. et al. Cone Beam Computed Tomography-Based Evaluation of the Accuracy of Implant Surgery with Conventional (Free Hand) Implant Placement vs Computer Fabricated 3D Guide Implant Placement. J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. 22, 1115–1122 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-023-01887-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-023-01887-7