Computer-guided vs freehand placement of immediately loaded dental implants: 5-year postloading results of a randomised controlled trial.

Q1 Dentistry European Journal of Oral Implantology Pub Date : 2018-01-01
Marco Tallarico, Marco Esposito, Erta Xhanari, Marco Caneva, Silvio Mario Meloni
{"title":"Computer-guided vs freehand placement of immediately loaded dental implants: 5-year postloading results of a randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Marco Tallarico,&nbsp;Marco Esposito,&nbsp;Erta Xhanari,&nbsp;Marco Caneva,&nbsp;Silvio Mario Meloni","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare planning and patient rehabilitation using 3D implant planning software and dedicated surgical templates with conventional freehand implant placement for the rehabilitation of partially or fully edentulous patients using flapless or mini-flap procedures and immediate loading.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients requiring at least two implants to be restored with a single prosthesis, having at least 7 mm of bone height and 4 mm in bone width were consecutively enrolled. Patients were randomised according to a parallel group study design into two groups: computerguided group or conventional freehand group. Implants were loaded immediately with a provisional prosthesis, replaced by a definitive prosthesis 4 months later. Outcome measures assessed by a blinded independent assessor were: implant and prosthesis failures, any complications, marginal bone levels, number of treatment sessions, duration of treatment, post-surgical pain and swelling, consumption of pain killers, surgical and prosthetic time, time required to solve complications, and patient satisfaction. Patients were followed up to 5 years after loading.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten patients (32 implants) were randomised to the computer-guided group and 10 patients (30 implants) were randomised to the freehand group. At the 5-year follow-up examination one patient of the computer-guided group and one of the freehand group dropped-out (both moved to another country). No prostheses failed during the entire follow-up. Two implants failed in the conventional group (6.6%) vs none in the computer-guided group (P = 0.158). Ten patients (five in each group) experienced 11 complications (six in the computer-guided group and five in the freehand group), that were successfully solved. Differences between groups for implant failures and complications were not statistically significant. Five years after loading, the mean marginal bone loss was 0.87 mm ± 0.40 (95% CI: 0.54 to 1.06 mm) in the computer-guided group and 1.29 mm ± 0.31 (95% CI: 1.09 to 1.51 mm) in the freehand group. The difference was statistically significant (difference 0.42 mm ± 0.54; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.75; P = 0.024). Patient self-reported post-surgical pain (P = 0.037) and swelling (P = 0.007) were found to be statistically significant higher in patients in the freehand group. Number of sessions from patient's recruitment to delivery of the definitive prosthesis, number of days from the initial CBCT scan to implant placement, consumption of painkillers, averaged surgical, prosthetic, and complication times, were not statistically significant different between the groups. At the 5-year followup, all the patients were fully satisfied with the function and aesthetics of their definitive prostheses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both approaches achieved successful results over the 5-year follow-up period. Statistically higher post-operative pain and swelling were experienced at sites treated freehand with flap elevation. Less marginal bone loss (0.4 mm) was observed in the computer-guided group, at 5 years follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":49259,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Oral Implantology","volume":"11 2","pages":"203-213"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Oral Implantology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare planning and patient rehabilitation using 3D implant planning software and dedicated surgical templates with conventional freehand implant placement for the rehabilitation of partially or fully edentulous patients using flapless or mini-flap procedures and immediate loading.

Materials and methods: Patients requiring at least two implants to be restored with a single prosthesis, having at least 7 mm of bone height and 4 mm in bone width were consecutively enrolled. Patients were randomised according to a parallel group study design into two groups: computerguided group or conventional freehand group. Implants were loaded immediately with a provisional prosthesis, replaced by a definitive prosthesis 4 months later. Outcome measures assessed by a blinded independent assessor were: implant and prosthesis failures, any complications, marginal bone levels, number of treatment sessions, duration of treatment, post-surgical pain and swelling, consumption of pain killers, surgical and prosthetic time, time required to solve complications, and patient satisfaction. Patients were followed up to 5 years after loading.

Results: Ten patients (32 implants) were randomised to the computer-guided group and 10 patients (30 implants) were randomised to the freehand group. At the 5-year follow-up examination one patient of the computer-guided group and one of the freehand group dropped-out (both moved to another country). No prostheses failed during the entire follow-up. Two implants failed in the conventional group (6.6%) vs none in the computer-guided group (P = 0.158). Ten patients (five in each group) experienced 11 complications (six in the computer-guided group and five in the freehand group), that were successfully solved. Differences between groups for implant failures and complications were not statistically significant. Five years after loading, the mean marginal bone loss was 0.87 mm ± 0.40 (95% CI: 0.54 to 1.06 mm) in the computer-guided group and 1.29 mm ± 0.31 (95% CI: 1.09 to 1.51 mm) in the freehand group. The difference was statistically significant (difference 0.42 mm ± 0.54; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.75; P = 0.024). Patient self-reported post-surgical pain (P = 0.037) and swelling (P = 0.007) were found to be statistically significant higher in patients in the freehand group. Number of sessions from patient's recruitment to delivery of the definitive prosthesis, number of days from the initial CBCT scan to implant placement, consumption of painkillers, averaged surgical, prosthetic, and complication times, were not statistically significant different between the groups. At the 5-year followup, all the patients were fully satisfied with the function and aesthetics of their definitive prostheses.

Conclusions: Both approaches achieved successful results over the 5-year follow-up period. Statistically higher post-operative pain and swelling were experienced at sites treated freehand with flap elevation. Less marginal bone loss (0.4 mm) was observed in the computer-guided group, at 5 years follow-up.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
计算机引导与徒手放置立即加载的牙种植体:加载后5年的随机对照试验结果
目的:比较使用3D种植体规划软件和专用手术模板与传统徒手种植体放置在部分或完全无牙患者中使用无瓣或迷你瓣手术和立即加载的康复计划和患者康复。材料与方法:连续入组骨高不低于7mm,骨宽不低于4mm,且需要至少两个种植体使用单个假体修复的患者。患者按照平行组研究设计随机分为两组:计算机引导组和传统徒手组。种植体立即装载临时假体,4个月后更换最终假体。由盲法独立评估者评估的结果指标包括:种植体和假体失败、任何并发症、边缘骨水平、治疗次数、治疗持续时间、术后疼痛和肿胀、止痛药的消耗、手术和假体时间、解决并发症所需的时间和患者满意度。患者在加载后随访5年。结果:10例患者(32个种植体)随机分为计算机引导组,10例患者(30个种植体)随机分为徒手组。在5年的随访检查中,电脑指导组和徒手组各有一名患者退出(两人都搬到了另一个国家)。在整个随访期间没有假体失败。常规组2例植入失败(6.6%),计算机引导组1例失败(P = 0.158)。10例患者(每组5例)出现11例并发症(电脑引导组6例,徒手组5例),均成功解决。两组间种植体失败和并发症的差异无统计学意义。加载后5年,计算机引导组的平均边缘骨丢失为0.87 mm±0.40 (95% CI: 0.54 ~ 1.06 mm),徒手组的平均边缘骨丢失为1.29 mm±0.31 (95% CI: 1.09 ~ 1.51 mm)。差异有统计学意义(差异0.42 mm±0.54;95% CI: 0.05 ~ 0.75;P = 0.024)。徒手组患者自我报告的术后疼痛(P = 0.037)和肿胀(P = 0.007)有统计学意义。从患者招募到交付最终假体的疗程数,从初始CBCT扫描到植入假体的天数,止痛药的消耗,平均手术,假体和并发症时间,两组之间没有统计学上的显著差异。在5年的随访中,所有患者对最终假体的功能和美观都非常满意。结论:在5年的随访期间,两种方法均取得了成功的效果。统计上,徒手皮瓣抬高部位术后疼痛和肿胀较高。在5年的随访中,计算机引导组观察到较少的边缘骨丢失(0.4 mm)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Oral Implantology
European Journal of Oral Implantology DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.35
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Immediate loading of fixed prostheses in fully edentulous jaws - 1-year follow-up from a single-cohort retrospective study. Research in focus. Dental implants with internal versus external connections: 1-year post-loading results from a pragmatic multicenter randomised controlled trial. Research in focus. Immediate, early (6 weeks) and delayed loading (3 months) of single, partial and full fixed implant supported prostheses: 1-year post-loading data from a multicentre randomised controlled trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1