An in-vitro analysis of the accuracy of different guided surgery systems – They are not all the same

9Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: Different static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) systems are available that are based on different design concepts. The objective was to assess seven different systems in a controlled environment. Materials and Methods: Each n = 20 implants were placed in identical mandible replicas (total n = 140). The systems utilized either drill-handles (group S and B), drill-body guidance (group Z and C), had the key attached to the drill (group D and V), or combined different design concepts (group N). The achieved final implant position was digitized utilizing cone-beam tomography and compared with the planned position. The angular deviation was defined as the primary outcome parameter. The means, standard deviation, and 95%-confidence intervals were analyzed statistically with 1-way ANOVA. A linear regression model was applied with the angle deviation as predictor and the sleeve height as response. Results: The overall angular deviation was 1.94 ± 1.51°, the 3D-deviation at the crest 0.54 ± 0.28 mm, and at the implant tip 0.67 ± 0.40 mm, respectively. Significant differences were found between the tested sCAIS systems. The angular deviation ranged between 0.88 ± 0.41° (S) and 3.97 ± 2.01° (C) (p

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Guentsch, A., Bjork, J., Saxe, R., Han, S., & Dentino, A. R. (2023). An in-vitro analysis of the accuracy of different guided surgery systems – They are not all the same. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 34(5), 531–541. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14061

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free