Accuracy of implant placement using three different surgical guides | ||||
| Egyptian Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 19, Volume 64, Issue 4 - October (Fixed Prosthodontics, Dental Materials, Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics), October 2018, Page 3713-3721 PDF (1.34 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/edj.2018.79239 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Author | ||||
| Maha Nagi | ||||
| Lecturer, Removable Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, British University in Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Aim of the study: This study was done to evaluate and compare the accuracy of implant placement using three differently constructed surgical guides (3D printed, laser sintered and CAD/ CAM milled surgical guides). Materials and Methods: Eighteen implants were placed in partially edentulous patients having maxillary bounded edentulous areas. Based on the method of construction, patients were divided into three groups: group I, received 3D printed surgical guides, group II: received laser sintered surgical guides and group III: received CAD/CAM milled surgical guides. Implant placement evaluation included the difference between the planned and the actual implant sites regarding the point of implant insertion (coronal deviation), apex position (apical deviation), and implant angulation (angular deviation) Results: The highest deviation values were obtained from group III (CAD/CAM milled surgical guides) followed by group II (laser sintered surgical guides), while group I (3D printed surgical guides) showed the least deviation values. There was a statistically significant difference between group I (3D printed surgical guides)) and group III (CAD/CAM milled surgical guides) regarding coronal deviation and apical deviation, also there was a statistically significant difference between group II (laser sintered surgical guides) and group III (CAD/CAM milled surgical guides) regarding coronal deviation and apical deviation, while there was no statistically significant difference between group I (3D printed surgical guides) and group II (laser sintered surgical guides), besides there was no statistically significant difference between the three groups regarding angular deviation. Conclusion: 3D printed surgical guides had the best accuracy (minimal deviation) followed by laser sintered surgical guides and the least accurate were the CAD/CAM milled surgical guide | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| surgical guides; 3D printing; laser sintering; CAD/CAM milling; implant accuracy | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 140 PDF Download: 837 |
||||
