Journal of Healthcare Engineering

Journal of Healthcare Engineering / 2015 / Article

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 6 |Article ID 314536 | 12 pages | https://doi.org/10.1260/2040-2295.6.4.779

Accuracy of a Dedicated Bone-Supported Surgical Template for Dental Implant Placement with Direct Visual Control

Received01 Jun 2015
Accepted01 Sep 2015

Abstract

The aim of this study is to evaluate feasibility and accuracy of dental implant placement utilizing a dedicated bone-supported surgical template. Thirty-eight implants (sixteen in maxilla, twenty-two in mandible) were placed in seven fully edentulous jaws (three maxillae, four mandibles) guided by the designed bone-supported surgical template. A voxel-based registration technique was applied to match pre- and post-operative CBCT scans. The mean angular deviation and mean linear deviation at the implant hex and apex were 6.4 ± 3.7° (0.7° – 14.8°), 1.47 ± 0.64 mm (0.5 – 2.56 mm) and 1.70 ± 1.01 mm (0.71 –4.39 mm), respectively. The presented bone-supported surgical template showed acceptable accuracy for clinical use. In return for reduced accuracy, clinicians gain accessibility when using this type of surgical template for both the maxilla and the mandible. This is particularly important in patients with reduced mouth opening.

References

  1. K. Verstreken, J. Van Cleynenbreugel, G. Marchal, I. Naert, P. Suetens, and D. van Steenberghe, “Computerassisted planning of oral implant surgery: a three-dimensional approach,” The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, vol. 11, pp. 806–810, 1996. View at: Google Scholar
  2. D. Van Steenberghe, C. Malevez, J. Van Cleynenbreugel et al., “Accuracy of drilling guides for transfer from three-dimensional CT-based planning to placement of zygoma implants in human cadavers,” Clinical oral implants research, vol. 14, pp. 131–136, 2003. View at: Google Scholar
  3. D. Schneider, P. Marquardt, M. Zwahlen, and R. E. Jung, “A systematic review on the accuracy and the clinical outcome of computer-guided template-based implant dentistry,” Clinical oral implants research, vol. 20, pp. 73–86, 2009. View at: Google Scholar
  4. J. D'Haese, T. Van De Velde, A. Komiyama, M. Hultin, and H. De Bruyn, “Accuracy and complications using computer-designed stereolithographic surgical guides for oral rehabilitation by means of dental implants: a review of the literature,” Clinical implant dentistry and related research, vol. 14, pp. 321–335, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  5. N. Van Assche, M. Vercruyssen, W. Coucke, W. Teughels, R. Jacobs, and M. Quirynen, “Accuracy of computeraided implant placement,” Clinical oral implants research, vol. 23, Suppl 6, pp. 112–123, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  6. X. Chen, J. Yuan, C. Wang, Y. Huang, and L. Kang, “Modular preoperative planning software for computeraided oral implantology and the application of a novel stereolithographic template: a pilot study,” Clinical implant dentistry and related research, vol. 12, pp. 181–193, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  7. F. Maes, A. Collignon, D. Vandermeulen, G. Marchal, and P. Suetens, “Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information,” IEEE transactions on medical imaging, vol. 16, pp. 187–198, 1997. View at: Google Scholar
  8. Y. Sun, H. T. Luebbers, J. O. Agbaje et al., “Accuracy of Dental Implant Placement Using CBCT-Derived Mucosa-Supported Stereolithographic Template,” Clinical implant dentistry and related research, vol. 17, pp. 862–870, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  9. M. Cassetta, A. Di Mambro, G. Di Giorgio, L. V. Stefanelli, and E. Barbato, “The Influence of the Tolerance between Mechanical Components on the Accuracy of Implants Inserted with a Stereolithographic Surgical Guide: A Retrospective Clinical Study,” Clinical implant dentistry and related research, vol. 17, pp. 580–588, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  10. J. D'Haese, T. Van De Velde, L. Elaut, and H. De Bruyn, “A prospective study on the accuracy of mucosally supported stereolithographic surgical guides in fully edentulous maxillae,” Clinical implant dentistry and related research, vol. 14, pp. 293–303, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  11. G. Van de Wiele, W. Teughels, M. Vercruyssen, W. Coucke, A. Temmerman, and M. Quirynen, “The accuracy of guided surgery via mucosa-supported stereolithographic surgical templates in the hands of surgeons with little experience,” Clinical oral implants research, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. M. Cassetta, M. Giansanti, A. Di Mambro, S. Calasso, and E. Barbato, “Accuracy of Two Stereolithographic Surgical Templates: A Retrospective Study,” Clinical implant dentistry and related research, vol. 15, pp. 448–459, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  13. V. Arisan, Z. C. Karabuda, and T. Ozdemir, “Accuracy of two stereolithographic guide systems for computeraided implant placement: a computed tomography-based clinical comparative study,” Journal of periodontology, vol. 81, pp. 43–51, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  14. A. E. Ersoy, I. Turkyilmaz, O. Ozan, and E. A. McGlumphy, “Reliability of implant placement with stereolithographic surgical guides generated from computed tomography: clinical data from 94 implants,” Journal of periodontology, vol. 79, pp. 1339–1345, 2008. View at: Google Scholar
  15. O. Ozan, I. Turkyilmaz, A. E. Ersoy, E. A. McGlumphy, and S. F. Rosenstiel, “Clinical accuracy of 3 different types of computed tomography-derived stereolithographic surgical guides in implant placement,” Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, vol. 67, pp. 394–401, 2009. View at: Google Scholar
  16. S. Stubinger, C. Buitrago-Tellez, and G. Cantelmi, “Deviations between placed and planned implant positions: an accuracy pilot study of skeletally supported stereolithographic surgical templates,” Clinical implant dentistry and related research, vol. 16, pp. 540–551, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  17. A. Pettersson, A. Komiyama, M. Hultin, K. Nasstrom, and B. Klinge, “Accuracy of virtually planned and template guided implant surgery on edentate patients,” Clinical implant dentistry and related research, vol. 14, pp. 527–537, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  18. R. M. Nada, T. J. Maal, K. H. Breuning, S. J. Berge, Y. A. Mostafa, and A. M. Kuijpers-Jagtman, “Accuracy and reproducibility of voxel based superimposition of cone beam computed tomography models on the anterior cranial base and the zygomatic arches,” PloS one, vol. 6:e16520, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  19. X. Liang, R. Jacobs, B. Hassan et al., “A comparative evaluation of Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and Multi-Slice CT (MSCT) Part I. On subjective image quality,” European journal of radiology, vol. 75, pp. 265–269, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  20. L. J. Stumpel, “Deformation of stereolithographically produced surgical guides: an observational case series report,” Clinical implant dentistry and related research, vol. 14, pp. 442–453, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  21. L. J. Stumpel, “Congruency of stereo lithographically produced surgical guide bases made from the same CBCT file: a pilot study,” Clinical implant dentistry and related research, vol. 15, pp. 531–537, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  22. L. Vrielinck, C. Politis, S. Schepers, M. Pauwels, and I. Naert, “Image-based planning and clinical validation of zygoma and pterygoid implant placement in patients with severe bone atrophy using customized drill guides. Preliminary results from a prospective clinical follow-up study,” International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, vol. 32, pp. 7–14, 2003. View at: Google Scholar
  23. X. Liang, I. Lambrichts, Y. Sun et al., “A comparative evaluation of Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and Multi-Slice CT (MSCT). Part II: On 3D model accuracy,” European journal of radiology, vol. 75, pp. 270–274, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  24. R. Gupta, M. Grasruck, C. Suess et al., “Ultra-high resolution flat-panel volume CT: fundamental principles, design architecture, and system characterization,” European radiology, vol. 16, pp. 1191–1205, 2006. View at: Google Scholar
  25. W. C. Scarfe and A. G. Farman, “What is cone-beam CT and how does it work?” Dental clinics of North America, vol. 52, pp. 707–730, 2008. View at: Google Scholar

Copyright © 2015 Hindawi Publishing Corporation. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

818 Views | 1083 Downloads | 2 Citations
 PDF  Download Citation  Citation
 Order printed copiesOrder

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly and safely as possible. Any author submitting a COVID-19 paper should notify us at help@hindawi.com to ensure their research is fast-tracked and made available on a preprint server as soon as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted articles related to COVID-19.