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, Luca Quartuccio, Andrea Benato, 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.
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.