The Influence of Guiding Concept on the Accuracy of Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery in Partially Edentulous Cases: An In Vitro Study
David Kasradze,
No information about this author
Ričardas Kubilius
No information about this author
Medicina,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
61(4), P. 617 - 617
Published: March 28, 2025
Background
and
Objectives:
Static
Computer-Assisted
Implant
Surgery
(sCAIS)
can
be
performed
with
different
drill
guiding
systems.
This
study
aimed
to
compare
the
accuracy
of
two
concepts
sCAIS
in
partially
edentulous
cases.
Materials
Methods:
Forty
polyamide
models
maxillae
seven
implantation
sites
were
fabricated.
In
total,
140
replica
implants
placed
keyless
(KL)
drill-key
(DK)
systems
using
static,
full-arch,
tooth-supported
surgical
guides.
Three-dimensional
crestal
apical,
angular
vertical
deviations
from
planned
implant
positions
compared
Mann–Whitney
U
Kruskal–Wallis
H
tests.
Intergroup
homogeneity
variance
was
examined
Levene’s
test
assess
precision.
Results:
Overall
median
3D
apical
KL
group
significantly
higher
DK
(0.86
mm
[0.63–0.98]
vs.
0.72
[0.52–0.89],
p
=
0.006
1.26
[0.98–1.52]
1.13
[0.70–1.45],
0.012).
subgroup
analysis,
a
system
showed
(p
0.029),
<
0.001)
extended
anterior
area,
proximal
posterior
single-tooth
gap
distal
site
free-end
situation.
Contrarily,
lower
0.007),
0.001),
0.003)
gap,
0.007)
situation
0.019)
Conclusions:
The
both
did
not
exceed
recommended
safety
margins.
Statistically
significant
differences
found
between
concepts.
Guiding
superior
varied
across
implantation.
Language: Английский
Factors affecting stability of surgical guides in mandibular unilateral distal extension situation: An in vitro study
Journal of Prosthodontics,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
unknown
Published: March 4, 2025
Unilateral
tooth-supported
guides
reported
less
effective
implant
placement
than
bilateral
guides.
Therefore,
this
study
evaluated
the
effect
of
guide
design,
replaced
tooth
location,
and
applied
forces
on
deviation
stability
mandibular
unilateral
Ten
epoxy
resin
models
with
soft
tissue
simulated
material
were
used.
For
each
model,
three
surgical
designs
generated:
a
fully
extended
guide,
two
fixation
pins,
one
pin.
Two
sleeves
incorporated
in
for
premolar
molar.
Forces
from
buccal
oral
directions
(0.1
N,
1
2.5
5
N).
An
intraoral
scanner
captured
resulting
displacement.
Virtual
implants
added
to
scan
(470
virtual
implants)
measure
their
original
planned
position.
Surgical
pins
showed
least
vertical
(0.38
±
0.27
mm,
p<0.001)
(0.52
0.25
p<0.001).
Guide
design
has
small
medium
size
all
measurements(p<0.001).
Force
direction
significantly
large
(η2
=
0.15,
magnitude
greatly
affects
angular
0.34,
A
larger
was
detected
molar
location
(0.59
0.48
mm
Incorporating
into
enhances
minimizes
deviation.
However,
during
guided
surgery
have
substantial
impact,
exceeding
influence
design.
Language: Английский
Influence of guide support on the accuracy of static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery (sCAIS) in partially edentulous cases using a keyless guiding system: an in vitro study
David Kasradze,
No information about this author
Ričardas Kubilius
No information about this author
BMC Oral Health,
Journal Year:
2025,
Volume and Issue:
25(1)
Published: April 13, 2025
To
evaluate
the
influence
of
guide
support
on
accuracy
sCAIS
using
a
keyless
guiding
system
in
different
cases
partial
edentulism.
Sixty
polyamide
models
partially
edentulous
maxillae,
simulating
anterior
and
posterior
single-tooth
gaps
as
well
distal
extended
areas,
were
fabricated.
Full-arch,
2-teeth,
4-teeth
supported
surgical
guides
used
to
place
implants
at
FDI
15,
17,
21,
26
sites
Model
A
12,
22,
15
B.
In
total,
210
replica
placed
120
seven
implantation
sites.
Three-dimensional
crestal
apical,
angular
vertical
deviations
from
planned
implant
positions
compared
Kruskal-Wallis
H
test
with
Dunn's
procedure
for
multiple
pairwise
comparisons.
Overall
median
3D
apical
2-teeth
(0.62
mm
[0.45-0.84],
0.92
[0.69-1.25])
(0.65
[0.52-0.81],
1.01
[0.8-1.26])
significalty
lower
full-arch
group
(0.86
[0.63-0.98],
1.26
[0.98-1.52])
values
p
<
0.017.
(2.61°
[1.71-3.75],
0.32
[0.15-0.44])
significantly
compare
(3.22°
[2.25-4.41],
0.46
[0.24-0.62]).
subgroup
analysis,
exhibited
higher
support,
whereas
21
site.
The
all
groups
did
not
exceed
recommended
safety
margins.
Statistically
significant
differences
found
between
groups,
varying
across
Not
applicable.
Language: Английский