Accuracy of keyless vs drill-key implant systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery using two guide-hole designs compared to freehand implant placement: an in vitro study.
Clemens Raabe, Tabea S Schuetz, Vivianne Chappuis, Burak Yilmaz, Samir Abou-Ayash, Emilio Couso-Queiruga
{"title":"Accuracy of keyless vs drill-key implant systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery using two guide-hole designs compared to freehand implant placement: an in vitro study.","authors":"Clemens Raabe, Tabea S Schuetz, Vivianne Chappuis, Burak Yilmaz, Samir Abou-Ayash, Emilio Couso-Queiruga","doi":"10.1186/s40729-023-00470-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This in vitro study aimed at comparing the accuracy of freehand implant placement with static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS), utilizing a keyless and a drill-key implant system and two guide-hole designs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 108 implants were placed in 18 partially edentulous maxillary models simulating two different alveolar ridge morphologies. 3D digital deviations between pre-planned and post-operative implant positions were obtained. Guide material reduction was assessed in the keyless implant system for the manufacturer's sleeve and sleeveless guide-hole designs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>sCAIS using a sleeveless guide-hole design demonstrated smaller mean angular, crestal and apical deviations compared to sCAIS utilizing a manufacturer's sleeve and the freehand group (2.6 ± 1.6°, vs 3.3 ± 1.9°, vs 4.0 ± 1.9°; 0.5 ± 0.3 mm, vs 0.6 ± 0.3 mm, vs 0.8 ± 0.3 mm; and 1.0 ± 0.5 mm, vs 1.2 ± 0.7 mm, vs 1.5 ± 0.6 mm). Smaller angular and apical mean deviations were observed in the keyless implant system as compared with the drill-key implant system (3.1 ± 1.7°, vs 3.5 ± 1.9°, p = 0.03; and 1.2 ± 0.6 mm, vs 1.4 ± 0.7 mm, p = 0.045). Overall, smaller angular, crestal, and apical deviations (p < 0.0001) were observed in healed alveolar ridges (2.4 ± 1.7°, 0.5 ± 0.3 mm, and 0.9 ± 0.5 mm) than in extraction sockets (4.2 ± 1.6°, 0.8 ± 0.3 mm, and 1.6 ± 0.5 mm). Higher mean volumetric material reduction was observed in sleeveless than in manufacturer's sleeve guide-holes (- 0.10 ± 0.15 mm<sup>3</sup>, vs - 0.03 ± 0.03 mm<sup>3</sup>, p = 0.006).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Higher final implant positional accuracy was observed in sCAIS for the keyless implant system, with a sleeveless guide-hole design, and in healed ridges. Sleeveless guide holes resulted in higher volumetric material reduction compared with the manufacturer's sleeve.</p>","PeriodicalId":14076,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Implant Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9905371/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Implant Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-023-00470-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Purpose: This in vitro study aimed at comparing the accuracy of freehand implant placement with static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS), utilizing a keyless and a drill-key implant system and two guide-hole designs.
Methods: A total of 108 implants were placed in 18 partially edentulous maxillary models simulating two different alveolar ridge morphologies. 3D digital deviations between pre-planned and post-operative implant positions were obtained. Guide material reduction was assessed in the keyless implant system for the manufacturer's sleeve and sleeveless guide-hole designs.
Results: sCAIS using a sleeveless guide-hole design demonstrated smaller mean angular, crestal and apical deviations compared to sCAIS utilizing a manufacturer's sleeve and the freehand group (2.6 ± 1.6°, vs 3.3 ± 1.9°, vs 4.0 ± 1.9°; 0.5 ± 0.3 mm, vs 0.6 ± 0.3 mm, vs 0.8 ± 0.3 mm; and 1.0 ± 0.5 mm, vs 1.2 ± 0.7 mm, vs 1.5 ± 0.6 mm). Smaller angular and apical mean deviations were observed in the keyless implant system as compared with the drill-key implant system (3.1 ± 1.7°, vs 3.5 ± 1.9°, p = 0.03; and 1.2 ± 0.6 mm, vs 1.4 ± 0.7 mm, p = 0.045). Overall, smaller angular, crestal, and apical deviations (p < 0.0001) were observed in healed alveolar ridges (2.4 ± 1.7°, 0.5 ± 0.3 mm, and 0.9 ± 0.5 mm) than in extraction sockets (4.2 ± 1.6°, 0.8 ± 0.3 mm, and 1.6 ± 0.5 mm). Higher mean volumetric material reduction was observed in sleeveless than in manufacturer's sleeve guide-holes (- 0.10 ± 0.15 mm3, vs - 0.03 ± 0.03 mm3, p = 0.006).
Conclusions: Higher final implant positional accuracy was observed in sCAIS for the keyless implant system, with a sleeveless guide-hole design, and in healed ridges. Sleeveless guide holes resulted in higher volumetric material reduction compared with the manufacturer's sleeve.
目的:本体外研究旨在比较徒手植入与静态计算机辅助植入手术(sCAIS)的准确性,采用无钥匙和钻钥匙植入系统以及两个导向孔设计。方法:将108颗种植体植入18个模拟两种不同牙槽嵴形态的部分无牙颌模型中。获得术前和术后种植体位置之间的三维数字偏差。在制造商的套筒和无套筒导向孔设计的无键植入系统中,评估了导向材料的减少。结果:与使用制造商套筒和徒手组的sCAIS相比,使用无袖导孔设计的sCAIS显示出更小的平均角度、顶点和根尖偏差(2.6±1.6°,3.3±1.9°,4.0±1.9°);0.5±0.3 mm, vs 0.6±0.3 mm, vs 0.8±0.3 mm;和1.0±0.5毫米和1.2±0.7毫米和1.5±0.6毫米)。无钥匙种植体系统的角度和根尖平均偏差比钻键种植体系统小(3.1±1.7°,vs 3.5±1.9°,p = 0.03;1.2±0.6 mm vs 1.4±0.7 mm, p = 0.045)。总体而言,较小的角、嵴和根尖偏差(p = 3, vs - 0.03±0.03 mm3, p = 0.006)。结论:sCAIS在无钥匙种植体系统中观察到更高的最终种植体定位精度,无袖导孔设计,愈合脊。与制造商的套筒相比,无套筒导向孔导致了更高的体积材料减少。
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Implant Dentistry is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the SpringerOpen brand. The journal is dedicated to promoting the exchange and discussion of all research areas relevant to implant dentistry in the form of systematic literature or invited reviews, prospective and retrospective clinical studies, clinical case reports, basic laboratory and animal research, and articles on material research and engineering.