{"title":"Comparison of accuracy between two different drill designs for static computer-assisted implant surgery: an in vitro study.","authors":"Mengyun Mao, Ting Wei, Mingxing Fan, Haisong Pan, Fudong Zhu","doi":"10.1016/j.jormas.2025.102303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although several different design methods have been proposed, limited research is available regarding how design features impact accuracy and performance. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of implant site location between two different drilling systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) in vitro study, each featuring a unique drill stabilization configuration.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Sixty models were fabricated simulating a patient with maxillary partial tooth missing. Each model included two single-tooth gap (STG) situations; two extraction socket sites; and a distal extension situation. Experimental models were categorized into two distinct groups, group A: a sleeve-in-sleeve system with a metal sleeve embedded in the surgical guide; group B: an integrated sleeve-on-drill system without a metal sleeve. The deviations in shoulder, tip, depth, and angular were measured. Date were analyzed using the Scheirer-Ray-Hare test (P ≤ 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The deviation of shoulder, tip and angular in group B were significantly lower than group A. When using an integrated sleeve-on-drill system, the remaining deviation values in extraction sockets were significantly higher than those in the STG situation and the distal extension situation, with the exception of depth deviation. However, there is no significant difference between STG situation and distal extension situation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In comparison to the sleeve-in-sleeve system with a metal sleeve in the surgical guide, the accuracy of an integrated sleeve-on-drill system without a metal sleeve was higher. The accuracy of implantation in extracted sockets was significantly lower than that in healing sites.</p>","PeriodicalId":56038,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"102303"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2025.102303","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Although several different design methods have been proposed, limited research is available regarding how design features impact accuracy and performance. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of implant site location between two different drilling systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) in vitro study, each featuring a unique drill stabilization configuration.
Materials and methods: Sixty models were fabricated simulating a patient with maxillary partial tooth missing. Each model included two single-tooth gap (STG) situations; two extraction socket sites; and a distal extension situation. Experimental models were categorized into two distinct groups, group A: a sleeve-in-sleeve system with a metal sleeve embedded in the surgical guide; group B: an integrated sleeve-on-drill system without a metal sleeve. The deviations in shoulder, tip, depth, and angular were measured. Date were analyzed using the Scheirer-Ray-Hare test (P ≤ 0.05).
Results: The deviation of shoulder, tip and angular in group B were significantly lower than group A. When using an integrated sleeve-on-drill system, the remaining deviation values in extraction sockets were significantly higher than those in the STG situation and the distal extension situation, with the exception of depth deviation. However, there is no significant difference between STG situation and distal extension situation.
Conclusion: In comparison to the sleeve-in-sleeve system with a metal sleeve in the surgical guide, the accuracy of an integrated sleeve-on-drill system without a metal sleeve was higher. The accuracy of implantation in extracted sockets was significantly lower than that in healing sites.
期刊介绍：
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg publishes research papers and techniques - (guest) editorials, original articles, reviews, technical notes, case reports, images, letters to the editor, guidelines - dedicated to enhancing surgical expertise in all fields relevant to oral and maxillofacial surgery: from plastic and reconstructive surgery of the face, oral surgery and medicine, … to dentofacial and maxillofacial orthopedics.
Original articles include clinical or laboratory investigations and clinical or equipment reports. Reviews include narrative reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subjected to peer review by international experts, and must:
Be written in excellent English, clear and easy to understand, precise and concise;
Bring new, interesting, valid information - and improve clinical care or guide future research;
Be solely the work of the author(s) stated;
Not have been previously published elsewhere and not be under consideration by another journal;
Be in accordance with the journal''s Guide for Authors'' instructions: manuscripts that fail to comply with these rules may be returned to the authors without being reviewed.
Under no circumstances does the journal guarantee publication before the editorial board makes its final decision.
The journal is indexed in the main international databases and is accessible worldwide through the ScienceDirect and ClinicalKey Platforms.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
