Editorial Type:
Article Category: Research Article
 | 
Online Publication Date: 12 Mar 2021

Comparison of Positioning Accuracy Between 2 Different Implant Systems Using Mucosa-Supported Surgical Templates: A Retrospective Clinical Study

DDS, PhD,
MD,
DDS, PhD,
MD,
, and
Page Range: 15 – 20
DOI: 10.1563/aaid-joi-D-19-00283
Save
Download PDF

Although guided implant surgery is widely practiced, clinical studies examining the differences in accuracy between implanting systems that use the same surgical guide are currently lacking. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the effects of different dental implanting systems on positioning accuracy using a uniform type of stereolithographic surgical guide to account for cumulative errors in guide production. One hundred BEGO Semados S implants (group A) and 91 NobelActive implants (group B) were inserted into patients using the same type of guide. The accuracy was assessed by matching the preoperative and postoperative cone-beam computerized tomography. The implant shoulder, tip, depth, and angular deviation were registered. Statistically significant differences between groups were determined using Student t test, bivariate correlation test, and generalized estimating equation. The angular deviation was 3.16 ± 1.74° in group A and 2.58 ± 1.41° in group B (P = .013); the depth deviation was 0.44 ± 0.23 mm in group A and 0.51 ± 0.22 mm in group B (P = .032). In terms of vertical accuracy, the Bego implant system is superior to the Nobel implant system using the same type of surgical guide, while the angle accuracy is opposite. Therefore, it is important to control the depth when using the template-guided surgery with the Nobel implant system. Similarly, angle control should be emphasized in the Bego implant system. Measurements of the deviations provide the basis for a clinical reference that will be useful in preoperative analysis for improving the safety and accuracy of guided implant surgical procedures.

Figure 1.
Figure 1.

The placed implants were compared with the preoperative surgical plan (yellow indicates the virtual planned position; blue indicates the postoperative position).


Figure 2.
Figure 2.

Three-dimensional evaluation of planned (gray) and placed (yellow) implant. α: the angular deviation between planned and placed implant axis; a: the implant shoulder deviation; d: the implant tip deviation; h: the depth deviation.


Contributor Notes

Corresponding author, e-mail: zfd@zju.edu.cn
These authors contributed equally to this work.
  • Download PDF