In-house protocol for fully guided zygomatic implant surgery and prosthesis repositioning. A technical note

Pub Date : 2024-08-02
Jorge Bertos-Quílez, Foskolos Pindaros-Georgios, Gian Maria Ragucci, Adaia Valls-Ontañón, Yolanda-Maria Liaropoulou, Daniel Paternostro-Betancourt, Federico Hernández-Alfaro
{"title":"In-house protocol for fully guided zygomatic implant surgery and prosthesis repositioning. A technical note","authors":"Jorge Bertos-Quílez, Foskolos Pindaros-Georgios, Gian Maria Ragucci, Adaia Valls-Ontañón, Yolanda-Maria Liaropoulou, Daniel Paternostro-Betancourt, Federico Hernández-Alfaro","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The present study aims to describe an in-house protocol for fully guided zygomatic implant surgery and prosthesis repositioning.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Four extramaxillary zygomatic dental implants (ZIs) were placed in one patient. The preoperative phase included digital planning, through which a surgical guide was designed and created. The analysis of the accuracy of guided surgery and the guided prosthesis repositioning was carried out by superimposing the digital planning with the final postsurgical implant positioning through CBCT. The radiologic evaluation included implant angular deviation, entrance and exit deviation, platform deviation, and apex apicocoronal and mesiodistal deviation. The prosthetic evaluation was performed in three directions: buccopalatal, apicocoronal, and mesiodistal.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All the ZIs successfully osseointegrated after 3 months of healing, with no complications. The mean axial angular implant deviation was 0.52 ± 0.36 degrees, and the mean implant depth deviation was 0.47 ± 0.28 mm. The entrance and exit deviation of the implants was 0.74 ± 0.42 mm and 0.7 ± 0.43 mm, respectively. The virtual prosthesis was superimposed and compared with the standard tessellation language file of the provisional polymethyl methacrylate prosthesis at the level of the first molars and central incisors; the mean buccopalatal deviation was 0.6 ± 0.035 mm, the mean apicocoronal deviation was 0.65 ± 0.11 mm, and the mean mesiodistal deviation was 0.3 ± 0.07 mm.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>According to the results obtained in this first case of the present case series, careful and meticulous digital planning based on the correct prosthetic parameters can safely guide the performance of surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The present study aims to describe an in-house protocol for fully guided zygomatic implant surgery and prosthesis repositioning.

Materials and methods: Four extramaxillary zygomatic dental implants (ZIs) were placed in one patient. The preoperative phase included digital planning, through which a surgical guide was designed and created. The analysis of the accuracy of guided surgery and the guided prosthesis repositioning was carried out by superimposing the digital planning with the final postsurgical implant positioning through CBCT. The radiologic evaluation included implant angular deviation, entrance and exit deviation, platform deviation, and apex apicocoronal and mesiodistal deviation. The prosthetic evaluation was performed in three directions: buccopalatal, apicocoronal, and mesiodistal.

Results: All the ZIs successfully osseointegrated after 3 months of healing, with no complications. The mean axial angular implant deviation was 0.52 ± 0.36 degrees, and the mean implant depth deviation was 0.47 ± 0.28 mm. The entrance and exit deviation of the implants was 0.74 ± 0.42 mm and 0.7 ± 0.43 mm, respectively. The virtual prosthesis was superimposed and compared with the standard tessellation language file of the provisional polymethyl methacrylate prosthesis at the level of the first molars and central incisors; the mean buccopalatal deviation was 0.6 ± 0.035 mm, the mean apicocoronal deviation was 0.65 ± 0.11 mm, and the mean mesiodistal deviation was 0.3 ± 0.07 mm.

Conclusions: According to the results obtained in this first case of the present case series, careful and meticulous digital planning based on the correct prosthetic parameters can safely guide the performance of surgery.

分享
全引导颧骨种植手术和修复体重新定位的内部规程。
目的:本研究旨在描述一种在完全引导下进行颧骨种植手术和修复体重新定位的内部方案:为一名患者植入了四颗颌外颧骨种植体(ZI)。术前阶段包括数字化规划,通过数字化规划设计和制作手术导板。通过 CBCT 将数字规划与最终的术后种植体定位相叠加,分析了引导手术和引导修复体重新定位的准确性。放射学评估包括种植体角度偏差、入口和出口偏差、平台偏差、顶端心尖偏差和牙周中偏差。修复评估从三个方向进行:颊腭、根尖和中碘:结果:所有的 ZI 均在 3 个月愈合后成功骨结合,无并发症。平均种植体轴向角度偏差为 0.52 ± 0.36 度,平均种植体深度偏差为 0.47 ± 0.28 毫米。种植体的入口和出口偏差分别为 0.74 ± 0.42 毫米和 0.7 ± 0.43 毫米。虚拟修复体与第一磨牙和中切牙水平的聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯临时修复体的标准方格语言文件进行了叠加和比较;平均颊腭偏差为(0.6±0.035)毫米,平均根尖冠偏差为(0.65±0.11)毫米,平均中髁偏差为(0.3±0.07)毫米:根据本病例系列中第一个病例的结果,以正确的修复参数为基础进行认真细致的数字化规划可以安全地指导手术的实施。
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
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信