Accuracy of Computer-Guided Flapless Implant Surgery in Fully Edentulous Arches and in Edentulous Arches With Fresh Extraction Sockets.

3区 医学 Q1 Dentistry Implant Dentistry Pub Date : 2019-06-01 DOI:10.1097/ID.0000000000000878
Alberto M Albiero, Luca Quartuccio, Andrea Benato, Renato Benato
{"title":"Accuracy of Computer-Guided Flapless Implant Surgery in Fully Edentulous Arches and in Edentulous Arches With Fresh Extraction Sockets.","authors":"Alberto M Albiero,&nbsp;Luca Quartuccio,&nbsp;Andrea Benato,&nbsp;Renato Benato","doi":"10.1097/ID.0000000000000878","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of computer-guided flapless implant (CGFI) surgery in edentulous jaws with fresh extraction sockets and compare it to CGFI in fully edentulous jaws.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Ten patients with a completely edentulous arch (group A) and ten patients presenting natural teeth with a hopeless prognosis in the upper or lower jaw (group B) were consecutively treated with CGFI. A multipiece radiographic guide was fabricated for group B patients. The accuracy was assessed by matching the planning cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) with a postoperative CBCT. Global coronal, global apical, angular deviation, and depth deviation were registered.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean global coronal deviation for group A was 1.12 ± 0.5 mm, the mean global apical deviation was 1.36 ± 0.7 mm, the mean angular deviation was 3.16 ± 1.8 degrees, and the mean depth deviation was 0.51 ± 0.7 mm. The mean global coronal deviation for group B was 1.28 ± 0.6 mm, the mean global apical deviation was 1.65 ± 0.7 mm, the mean angular deviation was 3.42 ± 1.5 degrees, and the mean depth deviation was 0.53 ± 0.9 mm. Global apical deviation was significantly higher in the group B (P = 0.007).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CGFI surgery in edentulous arches with fresh extraction sockets may be accurate. However, clinicians should be aware that higher apical deviation may occur in this setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":13309,"journal":{"name":"Implant Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1097/ID.0000000000000878","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implant Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000878","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of computer-guided flapless implant (CGFI) surgery in edentulous jaws with fresh extraction sockets and compare it to CGFI in fully edentulous jaws.

Materials and methods: Ten patients with a completely edentulous arch (group A) and ten patients presenting natural teeth with a hopeless prognosis in the upper or lower jaw (group B) were consecutively treated with CGFI. A multipiece radiographic guide was fabricated for group B patients. The accuracy was assessed by matching the planning cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) with a postoperative CBCT. Global coronal, global apical, angular deviation, and depth deviation were registered.

Results: The mean global coronal deviation for group A was 1.12 ± 0.5 mm, the mean global apical deviation was 1.36 ± 0.7 mm, the mean angular deviation was 3.16 ± 1.8 degrees, and the mean depth deviation was 0.51 ± 0.7 mm. The mean global coronal deviation for group B was 1.28 ± 0.6 mm, the mean global apical deviation was 1.65 ± 0.7 mm, the mean angular deviation was 3.42 ± 1.5 degrees, and the mean depth deviation was 0.53 ± 0.9 mm. Global apical deviation was significantly higher in the group B (P = 0.007).

Conclusion: CGFI surgery in edentulous arches with fresh extraction sockets may be accurate. However, clinicians should be aware that higher apical deviation may occur in this setting.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
计算机引导无瓣种植在全无牙弓和有新鲜拔牙槽的无牙弓中的准确性。
目的:本研究的目的是评估计算机引导无瓣种植(CGFI)手术的准确性,并将其与全无牙颌的CGFI进行比较。材料与方法:将10例全无牙弓患者(a组)和10例上颌自然牙预后不佳的患者(B组)连续进行CGFI治疗。B组患者制作多层片x线透视片。通过将计划锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)与术后CBCT相匹配来评估准确性。记录全局冠状、全局根尖、角度偏差和深度偏差。结果:A组冠状面平均偏移1.12±0.5 mm,根尖平均偏移1.36±0.7 mm,角度平均偏移3.16±1.8度,深度平均偏移0.51±0.7 mm。B组冠状面平均偏移1.28±0.6 mm,根尖平均偏移1.65±0.7 mm,角度平均偏移3.42±1.5度,深度平均偏移0.53±0.9 mm。B组整体根尖偏差明显高于对照组(P = 0.007)。结论:CGFI手术治疗无牙弓伴新鲜拔牙槽是准确的。然而,临床医生应该意识到在这种情况下可能会发生较高的根尖偏差。
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
Implant Dentistry
Implant Dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cessation. Implant Dentistry, an interdisciplinary forum for general practitioners, specialists, educators, and researchers, publishes relevant clinical, educational, and research articles that document current concepts of oral implantology in sections on biomaterials, clinical reports, oral and maxillofacial surgery, oral pathology, periodontics, prosthodontics, and research. The journal includes guest editorials, letters to the editor, book reviews, abstracts of current literature, and news of sponsoring societies.
期刊最新文献
The Editorial Council Implant. Comparison Between a Computer-Aided Surgical Template and the Free-Hand Method: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Long-Term Outcomes of Tooth-Implant-Supported Rehabilitation of Periodontally Compromised and Treated Patients Refusing Bone Grafting Surgical Therapies. Ridge Augmentation Comparing an Allograft Plus Autogenous Bone Chips to an Osteoinductive Demineralized Bone Matrix: A Clinical and Histologic Study in Humans.
×
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