Scholarlink

<p>There are various techniques to measure accuracy of dental implant surgery, but limited data validating the techniques used to analyze accuracy. Scan-body-assisted surface-based registration (SB-SBR) is deemed theoretically accurate, but with challenges in testing accuracy. The purpose of the study was to analyze the accuracy of SB-SBR for conventional (CVI) and zygomatic implants (ZI) using 2 complementary techniques. An in-vitro study was designed using a 3D-printed model of an edentulous maxilla with CVI and ZI digitally planned and placed. SB-SBR was performed on the physical model and on a model-free virtual setting, and the implant position was compared with those of the planned implants 10 times. Outcome variables were angular and linear errors (AE and LE), with thresholds of 1° and 1&#xa0;mm. Paired t-test and Wilcoxson signed-ranked test were used. Results showed greater AE for ZI versus CVI (mean difference, MD 0.42°). Apical LE was greater for ZI (MD 0.68&#xa0;mm), while CVI exhibited greater platform LE (MD 0.69&#xa0;mm). Overall AE remained under 1°, but the apical LE of ZI exceeded 1&#xa0;mm, which could potentially lead to violation of critical structures when combined with surgical error, highlighting the need for caution when interpreting data derived from SB-SBR especially for ZI.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

An in vitro accuracy study on scan body-assisted surface based registration for conventional and zygomatic dental implants

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月3日

查看全文
  • Michael D. Han,
  • Sebastian Graca,
  • Dima Ghunaim,
  • Leila Ahmadian

摘要

There are various techniques to measure accuracy of dental implant surgery, but limited data validating the techniques used to analyze accuracy. Scan-body-assisted surface-based registration (SB-SBR) is deemed theoretically accurate, but with challenges in testing accuracy. The purpose of the study was to analyze the accuracy of SB-SBR for conventional (CVI) and zygomatic implants (ZI) using 2 complementary techniques. An in-vitro study was designed using a 3D-printed model of an edentulous maxilla with CVI and ZI digitally planned and placed. SB-SBR was performed on the physical model and on a model-free virtual setting, and the implant position was compared with those of the planned implants 10 times. Outcome variables were angular and linear errors (AE and LE), with thresholds of 1° and 1 mm. Paired t-test and Wilcoxson signed-ranked test were used. Results showed greater AE for ZI versus CVI (mean difference, MD 0.42°). Apical LE was greater for ZI (MD 0.68 mm), while CVI exhibited greater platform LE (MD 0.69 mm). Overall AE remained under 1°, but the apical LE of ZI exceeded 1 mm, which could potentially lead to violation of critical structures when combined with surgical error, highlighting the need for caution when interpreting data derived from SB-SBR especially for ZI.