Accuracy of Proplan CMF R 3.0.1 versus Planmeca Romexis R 6.4.1; in the fabrication of occlusal repositioning splints for Orthognathic surgery; Randomized controlled trial | ||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||
| Volume 71, Issue 1 - Serial Number 2, January 2025, Pages 165-172 PDF (715.47 K) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2024.327122.3226 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Amr Amin Ghanem1; Ahmed Mohamed Sadek El Sokkary2; Mohamed Mahmoud Mohamed Nagy3; Mohib Sami Labib Girgis* 3 | ||
| 1Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, British University in Egypt, Cairo, Egypt | ||
| 2Instructor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. | ||
| 3Instructor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, the British University in Egypt, Cairo, Egypt. | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Objectives: This study compared the accuracy of two software programs, Proplan CMF R 3.0.1 and Planmeca Romexis R 6.4.1, for fabricating occlusal repositioning wafers for bimaxillary orthognathic surgery. Materials and Methods: Our research was conducted on 18 patients with skeletal deformities. Patients were randomly distributed into two groups: the control group, where 9 patients were planned by Proplan CMF R 3.0.1; and the study group, where 9 were planned by Planmeca R 6.4.1. All the patients underwent bimaxillary orthognathic surgery. Each patient received 2 CT scans preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively. Materialize 3-matic software was used to identify discrepancies between the virtual treatment plan and the outcome by superimposing the planned STL model with the postoperative one. Results: The deviations measured with Romexis were slightly higher than those with Proplan. However, the results had no significant differences (p > 0.05). Both programs effectively fabricated splints accurately enough to transfer the virtual planning to the operation theater. The mean differences between the planned and postoperative positions of the maxilla and mandible were 0.37 and 0.48 mm. Conclusion: This study supports the accuracy of both software programs (Proplan and Romexis) for splint fabrication for bimaxillary orthognathic surgery. However, further research is needed to refine software algorithms to reduce the observed minor variations. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Bimaxillary Orthognathic Surgery; Planmeca Romexis R 6.4.1; Proplan CMF R 3.0.1; Materialise 3-Matic; Repositioning Splints | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 236 PDF Download: 78 |
||
