Comparison of the accuracy of dental implant placement using static and dynamic computer-assisted systems: an in vitro study - 18/12/20

Doi : 10.1016/j.jormas.2020.11.008

Miao Zhou ^a,^{^{1
The authors contributed equally in the article.}}, Hui Zhou ^a,^b,^{^{1
The authors contributed equally in the article.}}, Shu-Yi Li ^a, Yi-Bo Zhu ^c, Yuan-Ming Geng ^d,⁎
^a Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Affiliated Stomatology Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou Key Laboratory of Basic and Applied Research of Oral Regenerative Medicine, Huangshadadao Road 39, 510182, Guangzhou, China
^b Department of Stomatology, the Eighth People Hospital of Guangzhou, Huayinglu Road 8, 510060, Guangzhou, China
^c 4th Dental Center of School and Hospital of Stomatology, Peking University, Dongsihuanzhonglu Road 41, 100025, Beijing, China
^d Department of Stomatology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Gongyedadaozhong Road 253, 510282, Guangzhou, China

^⁎Corresponding author.

Sous presse. Épreuves corrigées par l'auteur. Disponible en ligne depuis le Friday 18 December 2020
Cet article a été publié dans un numéro de la revue, cliquez ici pour y accéder

Abstract

Objectives

The study aimed to compare the accuracy of implant placement between static and dynamic computer-assisted systems (CAS) in a partially edentulous mandible model.

Materials & Methods

A total of 80 implants was placed in mandible models. The implants were placed using either static or dynamic computer-assisted system. Deviations of implant hex, apex and angulation were measured between preoperative planning and postoperative CBCT in planning software.

Results

The mean deviations of implant hex, apex and angulation in static CAS group were 1.15 ± 0.34 mm, 1.37 ± 0.38 mm and 2.60 ± 1.11 degree, while in dynamic CAS group were 0.40 ± 0.41 mm, 0.34 ± 0.33 mm and 0.97 ± 1.21 degree, respectively. Implant placement with dynamic CAS showed less deviations of shoulder, apex and angulation than with static CAS significantly.