Premium
Deviations between Placed and Planned Implant Positions: An Accuracy Pilot Study of Skeletally Supported Stereolithographic Surgical Templates
Author(s) -
Stübinger Stefan,
BuitragoTellez Carlos,
Cantelmi Gianni
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
clinical implant dentistry and related research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.338
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1708-8208
pISSN - 1523-0899
DOI - 10.1111/cid.12019
Subject(s) - coronal plane , confidence interval , medicine , implant , astra , orthodontics , template , absolute deviation , dentistry , mathematics , surgery , computer science , anatomy , statistics , physics , quantum mechanics , programming language
Purpose The aim of the present study was to evaluate deviations between virtually planned and placed implants by the use of skeletally supported stereolithographic templates. Materials and Methods Ten consecutive patients were selected for virtual three‐dimensional implant planning using the Facilitate TM software ( A stra T ech AB , M ölndal, S weden). Computer tomography images were obtained in the pre‐ and postoperative phase. Four deviation parameters (i.e. global, angular, depth, and lateral deviation) were defined and calculated between the planned and the placed implants, using the coordinates of their respective apical and coronal points. Results Deviations at the coronal positions appeared to be smaller (95% confidence interval: 0.15–1.0) as compared with apical positions (95% confidence interval: 0.14–1.1). But only the difference with regard to lateral measurements appeared to be statistically significant ( p = .03). Except for depth ( p = .01), no significant association between mesial or more distal locations could be detected concerning global ( p = .07), lateral ( p = .87), and angular ( p = .56) values in mixed model analyses. Overall, there was a slight tendency for higher values for more distal locations. Conclusion As slight deviations between planned and placed implants especially may occur even with skeletal‐supported templates, the clinician should be aware not to overestimate advocated surgical safety by using static navigation tools.