• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

两种不同光学扫描技术制作的静态计算机辅助种植手术导板指导种植时的种植体位置准确性:一项随机临床试验。

Accuracy of implant position when placed using static computer-assisted implant surgical guides manufactured with two different optical scanning techniques: a randomized clinical trial.

机构信息

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

Dental Implant Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.

出版信息

Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020 Mar;49(3):377-383. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2019.08.019. Epub 2019 Sep 20.

DOI:10.1016/j.ijom.2019.08.019
PMID:31543382
Abstract

Data from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and optical scans (intraoral or model scanner) are required for computer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS). This study compared the accuracy of implant position when placed with CAIS guides produced by intraoral and extraoral (model) scanning. Forty-seven patients received 60 single implants by means of CAIS. Each implant was randomly assigned to either the intraoral group (n=30) (Trios Scanner, 3Shape) or extraoral group (n=30), in which stereolithographic surgical guides were manufactured after conventional impression and extraoral scanning of the stone model (D900L Lab Scanner, 3Shape). CBCT and surface scan data were imported into coDiagnostiX software for virtual implant position planning and surgical guide design. Postoperative CBCT scans were obtained. Software was used to compare the deviation between the planned and final positions. Average deviation for the intraoral vs. model scan groups was 2.42°±1.47° vs. 3.23°±2.09° for implant angle, 0.87±0.49mm vs. 1.01±0.56mm for implant platform, and 1.10±0.53mm vs. 1.38±0.68mm for implant apex; there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (P>0.05). CAIS conducted with stereolithographic guides manufactured by means of intraoral or extraoral scans appears to result in equal accuracy of implant positioning.

摘要

需要使用锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)和光学扫描(口内或模型扫描仪)来进行计算机辅助种植手术(CAIS)。本研究比较了使用口内和口外(模型)扫描制作的 CAIS 引导器放置时种植体位置的准确性。47 名患者接受了 60 个单牙种植体的 CAIS 治疗。每个种植体随机分配到口内组(n=30)(Trios 扫描仪,3Shape)或口外组(n=30),在口外扫描石模型后,使用立体光刻手术导板制造(D900L Lab Scanner,3Shape)。将 CBCT 和表面扫描数据导入 coDiagnostiX 软件,以进行虚拟种植体位置规划和手术导板设计。术后获得 CBCT 扫描。使用软件比较计划位置和最终位置之间的偏差。口内扫描与模型扫描组的平均偏差为种植体角度为 2.42°±1.47°与 3.23°±2.09°,种植体平台为 0.87±0.49mm 与 1.01±0.56mm,种植体尖端为 1.10±0.53mm 与 1.38±0.68mm;两组之间无统计学差异(P>0.05)。使用口内或口外扫描制作的立体光刻引导器进行 CAIS 似乎可以获得相同的种植体定位精度。

相似文献

1
Accuracy of implant position when placed using static computer-assisted implant surgical guides manufactured with two different optical scanning techniques: a randomized clinical trial.两种不同光学扫描技术制作的静态计算机辅助种植手术导板指导种植时的种植体位置准确性:一项随机临床试验。
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020 Mar;49(3):377-383. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2019.08.019. Epub 2019 Sep 20.
2
The accuracy of static vs. dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in single tooth space: A randomized controlled trial.静态与动态计算机辅助种植手术在单个牙缺失位点的准确性:一项随机对照试验。
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Jun;30(6):505-514. doi: 10.1111/clr.13435. Epub 2019 May 7.
3
In Vivo Accuracy of Implant Placement Using a Full Digital Planning Modality and Stereolithographic Guides.使用全数字规划模式和立体光刻导板进行种植体植入的体内准确性
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019 Jan/Feb;34(1):124-132. doi: 10.11607/jomi.6939.
4
Comparison of the accuracy of implant position for two-implants supported fixed dental prosthesis using static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: A randomized controlled clinical trial.两种计算机辅助种植手术方法对种植体植入位置精度的比较:一项随机对照临床试验。静态和动态计算机辅助种植手术在支持固定义齿的两种植体中的应用。
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2020 Dec;22(6):672-678. doi: 10.1111/cid.12949. Epub 2020 Sep 17.
5
The accuracy of computer-guided implant surgery with tooth-supported, digitally designed drill guides based on CBCT and intraoral scanning. A prospective cohort study.基于 CBCT 和口内扫描的计算机引导种植手术中,以牙支持、数字化设计的钻头导板的准确性。一项前瞻性队列研究。
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Oct;30(10):1005-1015. doi: 10.1111/clr.13514. Epub 2019 Sep 9.
6
The accuracy of single-tooth implants placed using fully digital-guided surgery and freehand implant surgery.数字化导板辅助种植与徒手种植修复单颗牙的精度比较。
J Clin Periodontol. 2019 Sep;46(9):949-957. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13160. Epub 2019 Jul 19.
7
How Accurate Are Implant Surgical Guides Produced With Desktop Stereolithographic 3-Dimentional Printers?使用桌面立体光刻三维打印机制作的种植手术导板有多精确?
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Dec;75(12):2559.e1-2559.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2017.08.001. Epub 2017 Aug 5.
8
In vitro comparison of guided versus freehand implant placement: use of a new combined TRIOS surface scanning, Implant Studio, CBCT, and stereolithographic virtually planned and guided technique.引导式与徒手式种植体植入的体外比较:使用新型组合式TRIOS表面扫描、种植体工作室、锥形束CT以及立体光刻虚拟规划与引导技术
Int J Comput Dent. 2018;21(2):87-95.
9
The Impact of Surgical Guide Fixation and Implant Location on Accuracy of Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery.手术导板固定和种植体位置对静态计算机辅助种植手术精度的影响。
J Prosthodont. 2022 Feb;31(2):155-164. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13371. Epub 2021 May 10.
10
Fully guided implant surgery using Magnetic Resonance Imaging - An in vitro study on accuracy in human mandibles.基于磁共振成像的全引导种植手术——一项关于下颌骨准确性的人体体外研究。
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020 Aug;31(8):737-746. doi: 10.1111/clr.13622. Epub 2020 Jul 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Freehand vs. computer-aided implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis-part 1: accuracy of planned and placed implant position.徒手植入手术与计算机辅助植入手术:系统评价与荟萃分析——第1部分:种植体计划位置与植入位置的准确性
Int J Implant Dent. 2025 May 2;11(1):35. doi: 10.1186/s40729-025-00622-w.
2
Influence of clinical expertise and practical experience on transfer accuracy in guided dental implant placement - an in vitro study.临床专业知识和实践经验对引导式牙种植体放置转移精度的影响——一项体外研究。
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2024 Dec;28(4):1491-1500. doi: 10.1007/s10006-024-01269-4. Epub 2024 Jun 25.
3
Accuracy of implant placement with computer-aided static, dynamic, and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.
计算机辅助静态、动态和机器人辅助手术中植入物放置的准确性:临床试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMC Oral Health. 2024 Mar 21;24(1):359. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-04033-y.
4
Case report and literature review: autonomous robotic system assisted palatal implantation at an anterior teeth site compromised by periapical cyst.病例报告与文献综述:自主机器人系统辅助在前牙区根尖囊肿累及部位进行腭部种植
Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Jan 15;11:1335043. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1335043. eCollection 2024.
5
Reliability of a chairside CAD-CAM surgical guide for dental implant surgery on the anterior maxilla: An study.上颌前牙区牙种植手术椅旁CAD-CAM外科导板的可靠性:一项研究。
J Adv Prosthodont. 2023 Oct;15(5):259-270. doi: 10.4047/jap.2023.15.5.259. Epub 2023 Oct 26.
6
Influence of antagonist tooth on mandibular implant positioning during surgery among Indians.印度人群中手术期间拮抗牙对下颌种植体定位的影响。
Bioinformation. 2023 Apr 30;19(4):474-476. doi: 10.6026/97320630019474. eCollection 2023.
7
A digital strategy for intraoperative acquisition of actual drill position and rapid assessment of bony preparation accuracy using an intraoral scanner.一种使用口腔内扫描仪术中获取实际钻孔位置并快速评估骨预备精度的数字策略。
Heliyon. 2023 Jul 7;9(7):e18004. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18004. eCollection 2023 Jul.
8
Accuracy and patient-centered results of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in edentulous jaws: a retrospective cohort study.无牙颌中静态和动态计算机辅助种植手术的准确性和以患者为中心的结果:一项回顾性队列研究。
Clin Oral Investig. 2023 Sep;27(9):5427-5438. doi: 10.1007/s00784-023-05161-5. Epub 2023 Jul 22.
9
Digital implant placement accuracy: a clinical study on a fully-guided flapless single-unit immediate-loading protocol.数字化种植体植入精度:一项关于完全引导下无瓣单颗牙即刻负重方案的临床研究
Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023 May 17;45(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s40902-023-00387-5.
10
[Accuracy of computer-guided oral implant placement and influencing factors].[计算机引导下口腔种植体植入的准确性及影响因素]
Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi. 2022 Aug 25;39(4):841-847. doi: 10.7507/1001-5515.202110070.