Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery
Volume 38, Issue 6 , Pages 436-440, September 2010

An alternative method to match planned and achieved positions of implants, after virtual planning using cone-beam CT data and surgical guide templates – A method reducing patient radiation exposure (part I)

  • Hans-Joachim Nickenig, DMD, Dr (med. dent.)

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationHans-Joachim NICKENIG, DMD, Dr. med. dent., University Hospital Erlangen, Glückstr. 11, G-91054 Erlangen, Germany. Tel.: +49 2203 908 4668; Fax: +49 2241 390865.
  • ,
  • Stephan Eitner, PhD, DMD (med. dent.)

Department of Prosthodontics, University Hospital Erlangen, Head: Manfred Wichmann, PhD, DMD, Dr. med. dent, Glückstr. 11, G-91054 Erlangen, Germany

Received 23 May 2009; accepted 21 October 2009. published online 26 November 2009.

Summary 

Objectives

The present study describes a new method of evaluating the precision of surgically placed dental implants compared after virtual planning of implant positions using cone-beam computed tomography (CT) data and surgical guide templates. This method reduces radiation exposure for patients participating in scientific studies.

Materials and methods

Twenty-three implants in 10 patients with a unilateral free-end gap in the mandible (Kennedy Class II) were evaluated. After three-dimensional planning of implant position, the implant bed was prepared with a surgical guide template and transmucosal drilling. Preoperative cone-beam CT images were matched with postoperative images of the master cast with implant replicas. Deviations between planned and achieved positions were measured in position and axis.

Results

On average, the match between planned and placed implant axis was within 4.2 degrees (range, 0.0–10.0). The mean difference in distance at the implant shoulder was 0.9mm (range, 0.0–4.5). The mean difference in distance at the implant apex was 0.6mm (range, 0.0–2.7) in the lateral/medial direction and 0.9mm (range, 0.0–3.4) in the anterior/posterior direction.

Conclusions

This alternative matching method provides reliable postoperative evaluation of differences in position and axis of planned and placed implants while reducing patient radiation exposure.

Keywords: dental implantation, image processing, computer-assisted, three-dimensional, patient care planning

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1010-5182(09)00201-7

doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2009.10.025

Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery
Volume 38, Issue 6 , Pages 436-440, September 2010