Accuracy of two static computer-assisted implant surgery systems in partially edentulous patients: A randomized clinical trial using intraoral scan data.

OBJECTIVES

To compare implant deviations between two static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) systems in partially edentulous patients using intraoral scan data.

METHODS

Fully guided dental implant placements were planned using two implant systems, Straumann Bone Level Tapered (S-BLT) and CAMLOG SCREW LINE Promote plus (C-SL), with respective planning software (S-BLT: coDiagnostiX; C-SL: SMOP). Intraoperative scans were performed after implant placement and compared to virtual implant positions in Geomagic Control X (GCX) a software for three-dimensional (3D) quality control. Deviations were analyzed in a coordinate system (x-, y-, z-axis) and total deviations (entry point, apex, and angular deviations) were compared. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.0125.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients received 80 implants placed by 13 surgeons with varying experience in sCAIS. Deviations from 75 datasets were evaluated. Mean 3D deviation at the entry point was 0.64 ± 0.25 mm for S-BLT and 0.75 ± 0.33 mm for C-SL. At the apex, the mean 3D deviation was 1.00 ± 0.40 mm for S-BLT and 1.26 ± 0.68 mm for C-SL. The mean angular deviation was 3.22 ± 2.12° for S-BLT and 3.80 ± 2.81° for C-SL. No significant differences were observed between systems, surgeon experience or implant location (all p > 0.0125).

CONCLUSIONS

Both the drill-body guided (C-SL) and drill-handle guided (S-BLT) systems provide comparable and predictable outcomes in fully guided implant placements. No system or planning software was found to be superior.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

sCAIS ensures predictable results in terms of accuracy in implant positioning, compensating for varying levels of surgical experience.