Accuracy of implant position using surgical guides fabricated by three different additive techniques: A comparative in vitro study | ||||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||||
| Volume 71, Issue 2 - Serial Number 4, April 2025, Page 1455-1467 PDF (2.31 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2025.337833.3268 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Sherif Mohamed Abd Elhamid 1; Rim Adel Selima  2; Nermeen Abd Elsalam Rady 3; Mohamed Zaki Basiony 4
| ||||
| 1Lecturer of Prosthodontics, Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Pharos University, Egypt. | ||||
| 2Teaching Assistant, Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry Pharos University, Egypt. | ||||
| 3Assistant professor, Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry Alexandria University, Egypt. | ||||
| 4Lecturer of prosthodontics, Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Pharos University, Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Background: Several factors determine the degree of variation in dental implant location following computed tomography-guided surgery. Three-dimensional (3D) printing technologies are commercially available in the market. The influence of different technologies on the accuracy of printed surgical guides is unclear. The fabrication of surgical guides with desktop 3D printers is one such element, although their accuracy has yet to be completely verified. The major goal of this research was to assess the accuracy of implant placement in class I partly edentulous mandibular models utilizing three distinct additive approaches. Materials and Methods: For the current investigation, 18 mandibular class 1 dentulous casts were established and scanned using CBCT to ensure accurate planning of the eventual implant site. The placements of the implants in the premolar-molar area were digitally planned, and the future surgical guide was developed, and 3D printed utilising three distinct additive techniques: stereolithography (SLA), fused deposition modelling (FDM), and digital light processing. The research participants were separated into three groups. Each set includes six class I partly edentulous mandibular models. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in implant deviation across the research groups when comparing the intended and final implant positions. The lowest degree of variance was observed for the SLA group, followed by DLP, and lastly, the FDM group, which recorded the highest degree of deviation. Conclusions: Based on the outcomes of this investigation, we may conclude that stereolithography surgical guides are more accurate than fused deposition modeling and digital light processing. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Keywords: Surgical guide; Stereolithography; Fused Deposition Modeling; Digital Light Processing | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 92 PDF Download: 44 |
||||
