Freehand versus computer-guided implant placement: early implant failures in a case-control study.

IF 1.3 4区医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Quintessence international Pub Date : 2024-08-30 DOI:10.3290/j.qi.b5414733

Dima Halabi, Gil Slutzkey, Haya Meir, Alon Sebaoun, Ilan Beitlitum

{"title":"Freehand versus computer-guided implant placement: early implant failures in a case-control study.","authors":"Dima Halabi, Gil Slutzkey, Haya Meir, Alon Sebaoun, Ilan Beitlitum","doi":"10.3290/j.qi.b5414733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To evaluate the survival of fully guided implants placed with a hollow tooth-supported computerized surgical guide (TSSG).Method and materials: This retrospective study included 94 patients who underwent implant placement using freehand or TSSG by the same operator between 2015 and 2020. Early implant failures occurring within 1-year post-rehabilitation were assessed.Results: In the study, two types of implants were placed using two different techniques: TSSG and freehand. The TSSG group consisted of 84 S implants and 100 LP implants, and the freehand group included 90 S implants and 94 LP implants. The results showed that more implants survived when placed freehand compared to TSSG (181 [98.4%] vs 172 [93.5%], respectively, P .05). The only significant factor affecting the success rate was the type of implant, with LP implants having a higher survival rate in the TSSG group (P .05).Conclusion: Surgeons should consider the impact of implant type on survival rates when utilizing the TSSG system.","PeriodicalId":20831,"journal":{"name":"Quintessence international","volume":"0 0","pages":"548-558"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quintessence international","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.qi.b5414733","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the survival of fully guided implants placed with a hollow tooth-supported computerized surgical guide (TSSG).

Method and materials: This retrospective study included 94 patients who underwent implant placement using freehand or TSSG by the same operator between 2015 and 2020. Early implant failures occurring within 1-year post-rehabilitation were assessed.

Results: In the study, two types of implants were placed using two different techniques: TSSG and freehand. The TSSG group consisted of 84 S implants and 100 LP implants, and the freehand group included 90 S implants and 94 LP implants. The results showed that more implants survived when placed freehand compared to TSSG (181 [98.4%] vs 172 [93.5%], respectively, P .05). The only significant factor affecting the success rate was the type of implant, with LP implants having a higher survival rate in the TSSG group (P .05).

Conclusion: Surgeons should consider the impact of implant type on survival rates when utilizing the TSSG system.

查看原文本刊更多论文

徒手与计算机辅助种植体植入：病例对照研究中的早期种植失败案例。

目的评估使用空心牙支持计算机化手术导板（TSSG）植入的全引导种植体的存活率：这项回顾性研究纳入了2015年至2020年间由同一操作者使用徒手（FH）或牙支持计算机化手术导板（TSSG）植入种植体的94名患者。对康复后一年内发生的早期种植失败进行了评估：在这项研究中，使用两种不同的技术植入了两种类型的种植体：结果：研究采用两种不同的技术植入了两种类型的种植体：TSSG 和 FH。TSSG 组包括 84 个 S 型种植体和 100 个 LP 型种植体，而 FH 组包括 90 个 S 型种植体和 94 个 LP 型种植体。结果显示，与 TSSG 相比，FH 植入体的存活率更高（分别为 181 个（98.4%）和 172 个（93.5%），P < 0.05）。影响成功率的唯一重要因素是种植体类型，TSSG 组中 LP 种植体的存活率更高（P < 0.05）：外科医生在使用 TSSG 系统时应考虑植入物类型对存活率的影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Quintessence international 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

5.30%

发文量

审稿时长

1 months

期刊介绍： QI has a new contemporary design but continues its time-honored tradition of serving the needs of the general practitioner with clinically relevant articles that are scientifically based. Dr Eli Eliav and his editorial board are dedicated to practitioners worldwide through the presentation of high-level research, useful clinical procedures, and educational short case reports and clinical notes. Rigorous but timely manuscript review is the first order of business in their quest to publish a high-quality selection of articles in the multiple specialties and disciplines that encompass dentistry.