Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The impacts of registration-and-fixation device positioning on the performance of implant placement assisted by dynamic computer-aided surgery: A randomized controlled trial.
Wu, Bin-Zhang; Sun, Feng.
Affiliation
  • Wu BZ; First Clinical Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center for Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices, Beijing, China.
  • Sun F; First Clinical Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Center for Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices, Beijing, China.
Clin Oral Implants Res ; 35(4): 386-395, 2024 Apr.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38286766
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

To assess the efficacy of dynamic computer-aided surgery (dCAS) in replacing a single missing posterior tooth, we compare outcomes when using registration-and-fixation devices positioned anterior or posterior to the surgical site. Registration is performed on either the anterior or opposite posterior teeth.

METHODS:

Forty individuals needing posterior single-tooth implant placement were randomly assigned to anterior or posterior registration. Nine parameters were analyzed to detect the deviations between planned and actual implant placement, using Mann-Whitney and t-tests for nonnormally and normally distributed data, respectively.

RESULTS:

The overall average angular deviation for this study was 2.08 ± 1.12°, with the respective average 3D platform and apex deviations of 0.77 ± 0.32 mm and 0.88 ± 0.32 mm. Angular deviation values for individuals in the anterior and posterior registration groups were 1.58°(IQR 0.98°-2.38°) and 2.25°(IQR 1.46°-3.43°), respectively (p = .165), with 3D platform deviations of 0.81 ± 0.29 mm and 0.74 ± 0.36 mm (p = .464), as well as 3D apex deviations of 0.89 ± 0.32 mm and 0.88 ± 0.33 mm (p = .986). No significant variations in absolute buccolingual (platform, p = .659; apex, p = .063), apicocoronal (platform, p = .671; apex, p = .649), or mesiodistal (platform, p = .134; apex, p = .355) deviations were observed at either analyzed levels.

CONCLUSIONS:

Both anterior and posterior registration approaches facilitate accurate dCAS-mediated implant placement for single missing posterior teeth. The device's placement (posterior-to or anterior-to the surgical site) did not affect the clinician's ability to achieve the planned implant location.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Tooth / Dental Implants / Surgery, Computer-Assisted Type of study: Clinical_trials Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Journal subject: ODONTOLOGIA Year: 2024 Type: Article Affiliation country: China

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Tooth / Dental Implants / Surgery, Computer-Assisted Type of study: Clinical_trials Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Journal subject: ODONTOLOGIA Year: 2024 Type: Article Affiliation country: China