A Prospective Study on the Accuracy of Mucosally Supported Stereolithographic Surgical Guides in Fully Edentulous Maxillae
A Prospective Study on the Accuracy of Mucosally Supported Stereolithographic Surgical Guides in Fully Edentulous Maxillae
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00255.x
复制
发表时间：
2012-01-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
De Bruyn, Hugo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
D'haese, Jan;Van De Velde, Tommie;De Bruyn, Hugo
背景：无瓣种植体植入采用引导手术是广泛的，虽然缺乏临床出版物的精度。目的：本研究的目的是评估在无牙上颌中使用黏液支撑立体光刻导向的准确性。材料与方法：对13例患者连续安装78个骨速T种植体（Astra Tech AB, Mlndal, Sweden），种植体宽度为3.5 ~ 5mm，长度为8 ~ 15mm。植入物在手术当天进行功能加载，通过计算机断层扫描评估植入物的位置。使用Mimics 9.0软件（Materialise N. V., Leuven, Belgium）融合虚拟计划种植体和实际放置种植体的图像，并比较种植体的位置、轴线和间距。结果：1例种植体因印模材料残留形成脓肿而在植入后不久丢失。分析了77个种植体位置。在入口点的偏差范围为0.29 mm ~ 2.45 mm (SD: 0.44 mm)，平均值为0.91 mm。平均角度偏差为2.60（范围0.16-8.86;SD: 1.61）。在根尖点，偏差范围为0.32 ~ 3.01 mm，均值为1.13 mm （SD: 0.52 mm）。冠状和根尖种植间距离的平均偏差分别为0.18 mm（范围0.07 ~ 0.32 mm, SD: 0.15）和0.33 mm（范围0.12 ~ 0.69 mm, SD: 0.28）。这些偏差低于全球冠状和根尖偏差。结论：本研究首次探讨了立体骨刻、完整的、粘膜支持的手术导向在全无牙颌治疗中的准确性。临床医生应被警告，角度和线性偏差是预期的。与长种植体相比，短种植体的根尖偏差明显降低。种植体偏离的原因是多因素的；然而，它是不太可能的，生产过程的指南有一个主要的影响，总精度的粘膜支持立体光刻指南。
Background: Flapless implant placement using guided surgery is widespread, although clinical publications on the precision are lacking. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of mucosal-supported stereolithographic guides in the edentulous maxillae.Materials and Methods: Seventy-eight OsseoSpeed T implants (Astra Tech AB, Mlndal, Sweden) of 3.5 to 5 mm width and 8 to 15 mm length were installed consecutively in 13 patients. Implants were functionally loaded on the day of surgery, and implant location was assessed with a computed tomography scan. Mimics 9.0 software (Materialise N. V., Leuven, Belgium) was used to fuse the images of the virtually planned and actually placed implants, and the locations, axes, and interimplant distances were compared.Results: One implant was lost shortly after insertion because of abscess formation caused by remnants of impression material. Seventy-seven implant locations were analyzed. The deviation at the entrance point ranged between 0.29 mmand 2.45 mm (SD: 0.44 mm), with a mean of 0.91 mm. Average angle deviation was 2.60 (range 0.16-8.86; SD: 1.61). At the apical point, the deviation ranged between 0.32 mm and 3.01 mm, with a mean of 1.13 mm (SD: 0.52 mm). The mean deviation of the coronal and apical interimplant distance was respectively 0.18 mm (range 0.07-0.32 mm; SD: 0.15) and 0.33 mm (range 0.12-0.69 mm; SD: 0.28). These deviations are lower than the global coronal and apical deviations.Conclusion: The present study is the first to investigate the accuracy of stereolithographic, full, mucosally supported surgical guides in the treatment of fully edentulous maxillae. Clinicians should be warned that angular and linear deviations are to be expected. Short implants show significantly lower apical deviations compared with longer ones. Reasons for implant deviations aremultifactorial; however, it is unlikely that the production process of the guide has a major impact on the total accuracy of a mucosal-supported stereolithographic guide.