Suppr超能文献

全数字化导板引导下牙种植体植入的准确性:一项基于口腔内扫描数据的前瞻性临床体内研究。

Accuracy of fully guided dental implant placement: A prospective clinical in-vivo investigation using intraoral scan data.

出版信息

Int J Comput Dent. 2023 May 26;26(2):137-148. doi: 10.3290/j.ijcd.b3762753.

Abstract

AIM

To compare the planned implant position (PIP) with the transferred implant position (TIP) after fully guided implant placements in single-tooth gaps.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Dental implant placements were planned using two different implant systems (Camlog Screw-Line [C-SL] and Straumann Bone Level Tapered [S-BLT]), and two different planning software programs (SMOP and coDiagnostiX). All implants were placed according to fully guided protocols, and intraoral scans were performed intraoperatively. For the comparison of PIP and TIP, scan data were imported to Geomagic Control X (GCX) software and accuracies were evaluated. Deviations were reported in a coordinate system (x- [mesiodistal], y- [vestibulo-oral], and z- [vertical] axis) at entry points and apices. Total deviations, including angular deviations, were calculated with GCX. For statistical analysis, the level of significance was set to P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients received 26 implants. Mean 3D deviation at the implant's entry point was 0.61 mm ± 0.28 for C-SL and 0.63 mm ± 0.24 for S-BLT. For the implant's apex, mean 3D deviation of 0.96 mm ± 0.41 was documented for C-SL and 1.04 mm ± 0.34 for S-BLT. Mean angular deviation was 2.58 degrees ± 1.40 for C-SL and 2.89 degrees ± 1.12 for S-BLT. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between implant systems, but showed significant deviations regarding the z-axis, both at entry point and apex (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Fully guided implant placements in single-tooth gaps provide accurate results. Due to significant vertical deviations, reevaluation of both drilling and insertion depths prior to implant installation should be considered. Maintenance of 1.5- to 2-mm safety distances to critical structures was confirmed.

摘要

目的

比较单牙间隙中全引导种植体植入后计划种植体位置(PIP)与转移种植体位置(TIP)。

材料与方法

使用两种不同的种植体系统(Camlog Screw-Line [C-SL] 和 Straumann Bone Level Tapered [S-BLT])和两种不同的种植体规划软件程序(SMOP 和 coDiagnostiX)规划种植体植入位置。所有种植体均按照全引导方案植入,并在术中进行口腔内扫描。为了比较 PIP 和 TIP,将扫描数据导入 Geomagic Control X(GCX)软件并评估准确性。在坐标系(x-[近远中]、y-[颊舌]和 z-[垂直]轴)中报告入口点和根尖处的偏差。使用 GCX 计算总偏差,包括角度偏差。统计分析中,显著性水平设置为 P < 0.05。

结果

26 名患者共植入 26 颗种植体。C-SL 种植体入口处的平均 3D 偏差为 0.61mm ± 0.28,S-BLT 为 0.63mm ± 0.24。C-SL 种植体根尖处的平均 3D 偏差为 0.96mm ± 0.41,S-BLT 为 1.04mm ± 0.34。C-SL 的平均角度偏差为 2.58°±1.40,S-BLT 为 2.89°±1.12。统计分析显示种植体系统之间无显著差异,但入口点和根尖处 z 轴偏差有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。

结论

单牙间隙中全引导种植体植入可获得精确的结果。由于存在显著的垂直偏差,在植入种植体之前,应重新评估钻孔和植入深度。确认维持到临界结构 1.5-2mm 的安全距离。

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