An in vitro comparative evaluation between virtually planned implant positions on interactive implant software versus actual implant positions achieved using sterolithographic open guide system

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorSharma, Avnien_US
dc.contributor.authorAgarwal, Subodh Kumaren_US
dc.contributor.authorParkash, Harien_US
dc.contributor.authorMehra, Prafulen_US
dc.contributor.authorNagpal, Abhisheken_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-02T06:46:13Z
dc.date.available2020-01-02T06:46:13Z
dc.date.issued2019-03
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To evaluate and compare the positional and angular accuracy of virtual implant positions planned on cone-beam computed tomography and final implant positions achieved using a universal open guide system. Materials and Methods: A dual scan of a partially edentulous jaw model along with prosthesis was done, and virtual implant planning was performed. Three implant positions in relation to 35, 36, and 37 were simulated (Group A). In total, 24 implants were placed in eight replaceable bone blocks (Group B) in the same region on the model using an open stereolithographic template. The linear positions and angulation of the placed implants were determined using Vision Measuring Machine. Deviations between virtually planned and surgically placed implants were analyzed in terms of linear and angular measurements. Data were analyzed with the independent-sample t-test with differences P ≤ 0.05 being considered statistically significant. Results: The linear distance (mean ± standard deviation [SD]) in mesiodistal direction between implants in relation to 35 and 36, 36 and 37, 35 and 37 in Group A was 8.79 ± 0 mm, 8.71 ± 0 mm, and 17.50 ± 0 mm, respectively, and in Group B was 7.70 ± 0.58 mm, 8.11 ± 0.30 mm, and 15.80 ± 0.48 mm. All these above values were found to be statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05). The linear distance (mean ± SD) in the vertical direction (mesial) for implants placed in the region of 35, 36, 37 for Group A was 1.51 ± 0 mm, 1.51 ± 0 mm, and 2.47 ± 0 mm, respectively, and for Group B was 1.37 ± 0.32 mm, 1.65 ± 0.48 mm, and 1.79 ± 0.36 mm, respectively. The linear distance (mean ± SD) in the vertical direction (distal) for implants placed in the region of 35, 36, 37 for Group A was 3.37 ± 0 mm, 1.51 ± 0 mm, and 1.51 ± 0 mm, respectively, and for Group B was 1.86 ± 0.48 mm (P ≤ 0.05), 1.56 ± 0.23 mm, and 1.29 ± 0.39 mm (P ≤ 0.05), respectively. The angular deviation (perpendicularity) values for virtually planned implants (Group A) were 90.00° ± 0° and for implants placed in the region of 35, 36, and 37 (Group B) were 84.52° ± 5.4°, 83.57° ± 1.52°, and 80.41° ± 2.37°, respectively, which are highly significant (P ≤ 0.05). Conclusions: The stereolithographic universal open guide used in the study may be considered accurate for placement of implants in mesiodistal position and also in terms of perpendicularity but not in the vertical position. Stereolithographic open guide may be recommended for more accurate implant position, especially for the placement of multiple implants.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationsDepartment of Prosthodontics, Institute of Technology and Science Center for Dental Studies and Research, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, Indiaen_US
dc.identifier.citationSharma Avni, Agarwal Subodh Kumar, Parkash Hari, Mehra Praful, Nagpal Abhishek. An in vitro comparative evaluation between virtually planned implant positions on interactive implant software versus actual implant positions achieved using sterolithographic open guide system. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2019 Mar; 30(2): 254-260en_US
dc.identifier.issn0970-9290
dc.identifier.issn1998-3603
dc.identifier.placeIndiaen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://imsear.searo.who.int/handle/123456789/192220
dc.languageenen_US
dc.publisherIndian Society for Dental Researchen_US
dc.relation.issuenumber2en_US
dc.relation.volume30en_US
dc.source.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_938_18en_US
dc.subjectDental implanten_US
dc.subjectmodelen_US
dc.subjectopen guide systemen_US
dc.subjectstereolithographyen_US
dc.subjectuniversal surgical guideen_US
dc.subjectvision measuring machineen_US
dc.titleAn in vitro comparative evaluation between virtually planned implant positions on interactive implant software versus actual implant positions achieved using sterolithographic open guide systemen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
ijdr2019v30n2p254.pdf
Size:
3.63 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Collections
Indian Journal of Dental Research