Flapless Implant Surgery Using an Intraoperative Measuring Guide With Double-Armed Zirconia Sleeves: A Technical Note

Fang, Tinglu; Wang, Yingkai; Lou, Yuxin; Xie, Chenyang; Yu, Haiyang

doi:10.1563/aaid-joi-d-22-00050

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The surgical guide is a custom-made device that fits over the patient's teeth or gums and provides a precise guide for the implant placement. The guide has pre-planned holes that correspond to the desired implant locations, angles, and depths [ 11 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative Evaluation of Accuracy of Adjacent Parallel Implant Placements Between Dynamic Navigation and Static Guide: A Prospective Study

Parekar,

Selvaganesh,

Nesappan

2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim The study aims to compare the accuracy of dynamic navigation (DN) and static guides (SGs) for simultaneous adjacent parallel placement of implants, the time taken for the surgery, and the ease of handling the instruments. Materials and methods This prospective trial was carried out at the Department of Implantology of Saveetha Dental College from October 2022 to February 2023. A total of 20 patients who needed simultaneous adjacent dental implants were allocated randomly into two groups: Group 1 SG surgery and Group 2 DN surgery. Forty implants were placed, 20 under DN and 20 under SG. Bucco-lingual displacement, apico-coronal displacement, mesiodistal displacement, and mesiodistal angulation were compared between the two groups. The patients’ data in both groups were evaluated by operating surgeons along with the surgical time taken and the ease of handling of instruments. Results The 20 patients who underwent implant placement in the DN and SG groups all had adjacent missing teeth in posterior sites, including lower posteriors (70%) and upper posteriors (30%). There was improved precision in relation to the mesiodistal displacement and angulation of the anterior implant of the adjacent parallel implants. The mesiodistal displacement in Group 1 (SG) was 5.61 + 3.1 mm, which was higher than Group 2 (DN), which was 0.55 + 0.56 mm. The mesiodistal angulation was 3.1 + 2.9 degrees in Group 2 and 0.42 + 0.5 degrees in Group 1. The second implant had a significant difference (p < 0.005) in mesiodistal displacement, mesiodistal angulation, and bucco-lingual displacement. The difference between the intergroup surgical time (mean + SD) in Group 1 was 30 + 4.5 mins and in Group 2 was 60.7 + 10.1 mins, with p < 0.05 statistically significant. The comfort of the operator was better in the SG group. Conclusion Any digitally aided implant placement technique can improve placement accuracy but each has its downfalls. Achieving the highest levels of precision and long-lasting prosthetic results hinges on both the suitability of the chosen case and the expertise of the surgeon performing the implant placement.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The guide ensures that the implants are placed in the correct position and orientation, according to the pre-planned design. This can help reduce the risk of errors and complications that can occur with freehand implant placement [10][11][12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%