The Scalloped Surgical Guide as an Alternative to Flat Bone Reduction Guide in Full-Arch Implant Restoration.

The goal of this clinical report was to present an alternative to traditional flat bone reduction guides, using a custom-designed 3-dimensional (3D)-printed guide according to the future gingival margin of the planned dentition. A 61-year-old woman with concerns regarding her smile appearance was presented. The initial examination revealed excessive gingival show accompanied by excessive overjet. The dentition was in a failing situation. The proposed treatment plan, relying on the sufficient amount of bone and keratinized tissue, consisted of recontouring of the alveolar ridge and gingiva and placement of 6 implants and an FP-1 prosthesis after extraction of all remaining maxillary teeth. Digital smile design was completed, and a fully digitally guided surgery was planned. This consisted of using 3 surgical guides, starting with the fixation pin guide, continuing with the scalloped hard- and soft-tissue reduction guide, and finally the implant placement template. Following the surgery, the patient received a temporary restoration, and on the 4-month follow-up, a new polymethyl meta-acrylate temporary prosthesis was delivered. The patient's 7-month follow-up is presented in the article. The report of this triple-template guided surgery indicated that digital 3D planning is a considerably predictable tool to properly establish and evaluate future occlusal plane, smile line, and lip support. Scalloped guides seem to be an excellent alternative to conventional bone reduction guides since they require less bone removal and improve patient comfort during surgery.

Does guided level (fully or partially) influence implant placement accuracy at post-extraction sockets and healed sites? An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of guide level on the accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS) at post-extraction sockets and healed sites. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 30 duplicate dental models, with 300 potential implant sites, were used. All the models were equally randomized into three groups: fully guided (FG, n = 100), partially guided (PG, n = 100), and free handed (FH, n = 100) surgeries. After implant placement, the mean global, horizontal, depth, and angular deviations between the virtually planned and actual implant positions were measured automatically by a Python script within software Blender. RESULTS: Both FG and PG surgeries showed significantly higher accuracy than FH surgery at post-extraction sockets and healed sites. In both sCAIS groups, there were nearly 50% more deviations from implants placed at sockets than those from delayed placement. For the immediate implant placement, the accuracy of sCAIS was significantly affected by the level of guidance. The FG group exhibited lower deviations than the PG group, with a significant difference in coronal global and horizontal deviations (p < .05). For the healed sites, two guided groups exhibited similar outcomes (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: sCAISs provide more accuracy than the free-handed approach in position transferring from planning to a model simulation. Full guidance can significantly increase the accuracy, especially at post-extraction sites. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Guided protocols showed significantly higher accuracy than free-handed surgery regardless of implantation timing, but both had nearly 50% more deviations in immediate implant placement.