Accuracy of static computer-assisted implant placement in long span edentulous area by novice implant clinicians: A cross-sectional in vitro study comparing fully-guided, pilot-guided, and freehand implant placement protocols
Accuracy of static computer-assisted implant placement in long span edentulous area by novice implant clinicians: A cross-sectional in vitro study comparing fully-guided, pilot-guided, and freehand implant placement protocols
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/cid.12998
复制
发表时间：
2021-04-04
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Lau, Douglas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Abduo, Jaafar;Lau, Douglas
背景为保证种植体的准确放置，种植体放置手术中需要使用手术导板来控制种植体放置的步骤。目的评价种植新手在种植体放置过程中，根据全引导（FG）、引导（PG）、Freehand（FH）材料和方法通过3- 12个月的手术制作从右侧第一犬齿到第一磨牙的四个缺失牙齿的上颌骨手术模型，立体印刷14名种植牙科新医生参加了这项研究，他们中的每一个人都为每个种植体放置方案插入了一个犬齿和一个磨牙种植体。所有植入物放置步骤均在体模头中完成，以模拟临床情况。为了评估的准确性，种植体垂直，水平平台，水平顶点，角度，和种植体距离偏差从计划positions calculated.Results与垂直偏差除外，FG的位置显然是更准确的比PG和FH的位置的所有变量为犬和磨牙种植体。对于水平平台和顶点偏差以及植入距离偏差，PG放置明显比FH放置更准确。FG放置未显示植入物位置或平台或顶点水平偏差的显著影响。PG和FH的位置显示出增加的偏差在犬齿种植体比磨牙种植体，并在顶点的种植体比平台的implants.Conclusions在此体外研究的局限性，新手临床医生实现了一个更准确的种植体位置与FG的位置，其次是PG和FH的位置分别。因此，引导手术的形式对于新手临床医生是有益的。
Background To ensure accurate implant placement, surgical guides are used to control the steps of implant placement surgery.Purpose Evaluation of the accuracy of implant placement in long span edentulous area by novice implant clinicians according to fully-guided (FG), pilot-guided (PG), and freehand (FH) placement protocols.Materials and methods Maxillary surgical models with four missing teeth from the right first canine to the first molar were produced by 3-dimensional printing. Fourteen clinicians new to implant dentistry participated in the study, and each one of them inserted one canine and one molar implant for every implant placement protocol. All implant placement steps were completed in phantom heads to simulate the clinical situation. To evaluate the accuracy, the implant vertical, horizontal platform, horizontal apex, angle, and interimplant distance deviations from the planned positions were calculated.Results With the exception of vertical deviation, the FG placement was clearly more accurate than the PG and FH placements for all the variables for canine and molar implants. The PG placement was significantly more accurate than the FH placement for the horizontal platform and apex deviations, and interimplant distance deviation. The FG placement did not show a significant impact of the location of the implant, or the horizontal deviations of the platform or the apex. The PG and FH placements showed increased deviation at the canine implant than the molar implant, and at the apex of the implants than the platform of the implants.Conclusions Within the limitations of this in vitro study, novice clinicians achieved a significantly more accurate implant position with FG placement, followed by PG and FH placements respectively. Therefore, a form of guided surgery is beneficial for novice clinicians.