Accuracy of the match between cone beam computed tomography and model scan data in template‐guided implant planning: A prospective controlled clinical study

Schnutenhaus, Sigmar; Gröller, Sebastian; Luthardt, Ralph G.; Rudolph, Heike

doi:10.1111/cid.12614

Cited by 31 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies on the accuracy of image matching between optical scans of dental models and CBCT data have reported an error ranging from 0.2 to 0.6 mm 5,14,15 . Comparable to previous trials, the registration errors in this study ranged from 0.27 to 0.52 mm, and the smallest errors were in the group that used the entire image of full‐arch tissue replica for image matching.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 51%

Comparison of the Accuracy of Image Registration Methods for Merging Optical Scan and Radiographic Data in Edentulous Jaws

Woo

Mai

Lee

2020

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The image registration of optical scans to radiographic images is essential for performing computer-guided implant surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different image matching conditions on the accuracy of image registration for computer-guided implant surgery in completely edentulous jaws. Materials and Methods: The optical scan image of a completely edentulous study model was registered to the respective cone-beam computed tomography data using three different image matching conditions: small point (SP), large point (LP), and entire surface (ES). For the SP and LP groups, gutta-percha markers (1.0 and 3.0 mm in diameter) were attached to a base template, and a radiopaque impression material was relined on the intaglio surface of template in the ES group. Image registration was performed by 20 operators in the images obtained from each group at an interval of 2 weeks (n = 20 in each group), and the registration accuracy was assessed by calculating the aligned position of the edentulous arch image. One-way analysis of variance with Tukey post hoc tests was used to compare the results among the groups (α = 0.05). Results: The mean registration error was significantly larger in the SP group (0.52 ± 0.19 mm) than in the LP group (0.29 ± 0.08 mm) and ES group (0.27 ±0.06 mm) (F = 24.689, p < 0.001). No difference was found between the LP and ES groups. The image matching discrepancy was more homogeneously distributed on the arch in the ES group than in the other groups. Conclusion: The accuracy of image registration is affected by the size of the congruent area shown in the optical scan and radiographic images. The entire surface-based matching method is more accurate as compared to the small point-based matching method in the image registration for implant planning in full edentulous jaws.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 51%

Comparison of the Accuracy of Image Registration Methods for Merging Optical Scan and Radiographic Data in Edentulous Jaws

Woo

Mai

Lee

2020

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Schnutenhaus et al [38] investigated the clinical accuracy of the CBCT matching method. They concluded that matching CBCT data with model scan data was accurate enough for planning sGIS and suggested that the radiographic template could be dispensed with to save time and money of the patient.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The major limitation of this fully digital planning workflow is that, currently, it can only be adopted in dentate patients. For the surface registration protocol, more than five remaining teeth were necessary to achieve appropriate matching of the CBCT and intraoral scans [8,38]. In addition, the distribution of the remaining teeth is also important.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fully Digital Workflow for Planning Static Guided Implant Surgery: A Prospective Accuracy Study

Lin

Huang

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The accuracy of static guided implant surgery (sGIS) using conventional planning workflow has been extensively examined; however, more information is required to justify the application of fully digital planning protocol. The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical accuracy of sGIS with a fully digital planning workflow. Twenty-one partially edentulous patients were enrolled in this prospective study. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and intraoral scans were taken and superimposed by matching the dental surface images directly (surface registration protocol) or by matching fiducial markers on a stereolithographic (SLA) radiographic template fabricated from the digital data of the intraoral scan (fiducial marker registration protocol). Virtual implant treatment plans were then determined, and tooth-supported SLA surgical guides were fabricated according to the plans. Twenty-six implant surgeries were performed via the surgical guide by one surgeon. Pre- and post-operative CBCT images were superimposed, and the positional and angular deviations between placed and planned implants were measured with metrology software. A total of 43 fully guided implants were placed, in which 25 implants were planned with the surface registration protocol. Implants planned based on the surface registration protocol had a larger mean angular deviation than the fiducial marker registration protocol. No significant differences were found for any deviations of the examined variables. Within the limits of this study, we concluded that the clinical accuracy of the sGIS planned with a fully digital workflow was consistent with the conventional workflow for partially edentulous patients.

show abstract

“…X-ray data for 3D virtual planning purposes are produced by CBCT and saved as voxel based volumetric DICOM files, whereas the intraoral scans and the wax up/set up of the final restoration are saved as surface polygons in STL format. According to the results of a prospective controlled clinical investigation by Schnutenhaus et al manual alignment between CBCT and model scan data performed using afore mentioned software can lead to mean deviations of 0.2 mm [34]. However, matching CBCT and surface scans and 3D printing surgical guides using SMOP lead to a more accurate implant positioning compared to surgical guides which use physical positioners to transfer the coordinates of the planned drilling slots [35].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Accurate Is Oral Implant Installation Using Surgical Guides Printed from a Degradable and Steam-Sterilized Biopolymer?

Pieralli

Spies

Hromadnik

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

3D printed surgical guides are used for prosthetically-driven oral implant placement. When manufacturing these guides, information regarding suitable printing techniques and materials as well as the necessity for additional, non-printed stock parts such as metal sleeves is scarce. The aim of the investigation was to determine the accuracy of a surgical workflow for oral implant placement using guides manufactured by means of fused deposition modeling (FDM) from a biodegradable and sterilizable biopolymer filament. Furthermore, the potential benefit of metal sleeve inserts should be assessed. A surgical guide was designed for the installation of two implants in the region of the second premolar (SP) and second molar (SM) in a mandibular typodont model. For two additive manufacturing techniques (stereolithography [SLA]: reference group, FDM: observational group) n = 10 surgical guides, with (S) and without (NS) metal sleeves, were used. This resulted in 4 groups of 10 samples each (SLA-S/NS, FDM-S/NS). Target and real implant positions were superimposed and compared using a dedicated software. Sagittal, transversal, and vertical discrepancies at the level of the implant shoulder, apex and regarding the main axis were determined. MANOVA with posthoc Tukey tests were performed for statistical analyses. Placed implants showed sagittal and transversal discrepancies of <1 mm, vertical discrepancies of <0.6 mm, and axial deviations of ≤3°. In the vertical dimension, no differences between the four groups were measured (p ≤ 0.054). In the sagittal dimension, SLA groups showed decreased deviations in the implant shoulder region compared to FDM (p ≤ 0.033), whereas no differences in the transversal dimension between the groups were measured (p ≤ 0.054). The use of metal sleeves did not affect axial, vertical, and sagittal accuracy, but resulted in increased transversal deviations (p = 0.001). Regarding accuracy, biopolymer-based surgical guides manufactured by means of FDM present similar accuracy than SLA. Cytotoxicity tests are necessary to confirm their biocompatibility in the oral environment.

show abstract

Accuracy of the match between cone beam computed tomography and model scan data in template‐guided implant planning: A prospective controlled clinical study

Cited by 31 publications

References 28 publications

Comparison of the Accuracy of Image Registration Methods for Merging Optical Scan and Radiographic Data in Edentulous Jaws

Comparison of the Accuracy of Image Registration Methods for Merging Optical Scan and Radiographic Data in Edentulous Jaws

Fully Digital Workflow for Planning Static Guided Implant Surgery: A Prospective Accuracy Study

How Accurate Is Oral Implant Installation Using Surgical Guides Printed from a Degradable and Steam-Sterilized Biopolymer?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About