Clinical Accuracy of 3 Different Types of Computed Tomography-Derived Stereolithographic Surgical Guides in Implant Placement

Purpose Presurgical planning is essential to achieve esthetic and functional implants. The goal of this clinical study was to determine the angular and linear deviations at the implant neck and apex between planned and placed implants using stereolithographic (SLA) surgical guides. Patients and Meth...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery 2009-02, Vol.67 (2), p.394-401
Hauptverfasser: Ozan, Oguz, DDS, PhD, Turkyilmaz, Ilser, DDS, PhD, Ersoy, Ahmet Ersan, DDS, PhD, McGlumphy, Edwin A., DDS, MS, Rosenstiel, Stephen F., BDS, MSD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 401
container_issue 2
container_start_page 394
container_title Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery
container_volume 67
creator Ozan, Oguz, DDS, PhD
Turkyilmaz, Ilser, DDS, PhD
Ersoy, Ahmet Ersan, DDS, PhD
McGlumphy, Edwin A., DDS, MS
Rosenstiel, Stephen F., BDS, MSD
description Purpose Presurgical planning is essential to achieve esthetic and functional implants. The goal of this clinical study was to determine the angular and linear deviations at the implant neck and apex between planned and placed implants using stereolithographic (SLA) surgical guides. Patients and Methods A total of 110 implants were placed using SLA surgical guides generated from computed tomography (CT). All patients used the radiographic templates during CT scanning. After obtaining 3-dimensional CT scans, each implant insertion was simulated on the CT images. SLA surgical guides using a rapid prototyping method including a laser beam were used during implant insertion. A new CT scan was made for each patient after implant insertion. Special software was used to match images of the planned and placed implants, and their positions and axes were compared. Results The mean angular deviation of all placed implants was 4.1° ± 2.3°, whereas mean linear deviation was 1.11 ± 0.7 mm at the implant neck and 1.41 ± 0.9 mm at the implant apex compared with the planned implants. The angular deviations of the placed implants compared with the planned implants were 2.91° ± 1.3°, 4.63° ± 2.6°, and 4.51° ± 2.1° for the tooth-supported, bone-supported, and mucosa-supported SLA surgical guides, respectively. Conclusion The results of this study suggested that stereolithographic surgical guides using CT data may be reliable in implant placement, and tooth-supported SLA surgical guides were more accurate than bone- or mucosa-supported SLA surgical guides.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.joms.2008.09.033
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66812882</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0278239108014845</els_id><sourcerecordid>20388810</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-ca48b95f2b7e2f233c0e4285d25d021407c6ff4c3617477c78c6eed12c6916423</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkkGL1EAQhYMo7rj6BzxILnpL7OpOOh0QYZl114UFhRnPTaZS2e0xScfuZCEH_7udnaDgQelDQ9VXj6Lei6LXwFJgIN8f06PtfMoZUykrUybEk2gDuYAkZ7l4Gm0YL1TCRQln0Qvvj4wB5IV8Hp1BCUJJkJvo57Y1vcGqjS8QJ1fhHNsmFvGlaRpy1I_xfh7IL8Wt7YZppDre287euWq4n5NLcuYhlHZjgG1rxvtTx2C8m9zdo_D1ZOqgYPr4phvaKkh-bSukLoi_jJ41Vevp1fqfR9-uPu23n5PbL9c324vbBHMhxwSrTB3KvOGHgnjDhUBGGVd5zfOacchYgbJpMhQSiqwosFAoiWrgKEuQGRfn0buT7uDsj4n8qDvjkdqwDdnJaykVcKX-D3ImlFLAAshPIDrrvaNGD850lZs1ML24o496cUcv7mhW6uBOGHqzqk-Hjuo_I6sdAXi7ApUPp2tc1aPxvzkOwMNTgftw4igc7cGQ0x4N9Ui1cYSjrq359x4f_xrHNQXfaSZ_tJPrgx0atOea6d2SoyVGTDHIVJaLX9fgwxE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>20388810</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Clinical Accuracy of 3 Different Types of Computed Tomography-Derived Stereolithographic Surgical Guides in Implant Placement</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Ozan, Oguz, DDS, PhD ; Turkyilmaz, Ilser, DDS, PhD ; Ersoy, Ahmet Ersan, DDS, PhD ; McGlumphy, Edwin A., DDS, MS ; Rosenstiel, Stephen F., BDS, MSD</creator><creatorcontrib>Ozan, Oguz, DDS, PhD ; Turkyilmaz, Ilser, DDS, PhD ; Ersoy, Ahmet Ersan, DDS, PhD ; McGlumphy, Edwin A., DDS, MS ; Rosenstiel, Stephen F., BDS, MSD</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose Presurgical planning is essential to achieve esthetic and functional implants. The goal of this clinical study was to determine the angular and linear deviations at the implant neck and apex between planned and placed implants using stereolithographic (SLA) surgical guides. Patients and Methods A total of 110 implants were placed using SLA surgical guides generated from computed tomography (CT). All patients used the radiographic templates during CT scanning. After obtaining 3-dimensional CT scans, each implant insertion was simulated on the CT images. SLA surgical guides using a rapid prototyping method including a laser beam were used during implant insertion. A new CT scan was made for each patient after implant insertion. Special software was used to match images of the planned and placed implants, and their positions and axes were compared. Results The mean angular deviation of all placed implants was 4.1° ± 2.3°, whereas mean linear deviation was 1.11 ± 0.7 mm at the implant neck and 1.41 ± 0.9 mm at the implant apex compared with the planned implants. The angular deviations of the placed implants compared with the planned implants were 2.91° ± 1.3°, 4.63° ± 2.6°, and 4.51° ± 2.1° for the tooth-supported, bone-supported, and mucosa-supported SLA surgical guides, respectively. Conclusion The results of this study suggested that stereolithographic surgical guides using CT data may be reliable in implant placement, and tooth-supported SLA surgical guides were more accurate than bone- or mucosa-supported SLA surgical guides.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0278-2391</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-5053</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2008.09.033</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19138616</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JOMSDA</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods ; Dental Models ; Dentistry ; Female ; Humans ; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted ; Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods ; Jaw, Edentulous - diagnostic imaging ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Models, Anatomic ; Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology ; Patient Care Planning ; Photography, Dental ; Statistics, Nonparametric ; Surgery ; Surgery, Computer-Assisted ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><ispartof>Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2009-02, Vol.67 (2), p.394-401</ispartof><rights>American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons</rights><rights>2009 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons</rights><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-ca48b95f2b7e2f233c0e4285d25d021407c6ff4c3617477c78c6eed12c6916423</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-ca48b95f2b7e2f233c0e4285d25d021407c6ff4c3617477c78c6eed12c6916423</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278239108014845$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=21121218$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19138616$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ozan, Oguz, DDS, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turkyilmaz, Ilser, DDS, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ersoy, Ahmet Ersan, DDS, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGlumphy, Edwin A., DDS, MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosenstiel, Stephen F., BDS, MSD</creatorcontrib><title>Clinical Accuracy of 3 Different Types of Computed Tomography-Derived Stereolithographic Surgical Guides in Implant Placement</title><title>Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</title><addtitle>J Oral Maxillofac Surg</addtitle><description>Purpose Presurgical planning is essential to achieve esthetic and functional implants. The goal of this clinical study was to determine the angular and linear deviations at the implant neck and apex between planned and placed implants using stereolithographic (SLA) surgical guides. Patients and Methods A total of 110 implants were placed using SLA surgical guides generated from computed tomography (CT). All patients used the radiographic templates during CT scanning. After obtaining 3-dimensional CT scans, each implant insertion was simulated on the CT images. SLA surgical guides using a rapid prototyping method including a laser beam were used during implant insertion. A new CT scan was made for each patient after implant insertion. Special software was used to match images of the planned and placed implants, and their positions and axes were compared. Results The mean angular deviation of all placed implants was 4.1° ± 2.3°, whereas mean linear deviation was 1.11 ± 0.7 mm at the implant neck and 1.41 ± 0.9 mm at the implant apex compared with the planned implants. The angular deviations of the placed implants compared with the planned implants were 2.91° ± 1.3°, 4.63° ± 2.6°, and 4.51° ± 2.1° for the tooth-supported, bone-supported, and mucosa-supported SLA surgical guides, respectively. Conclusion The results of this study suggested that stereolithographic surgical guides using CT data may be reliable in implant placement, and tooth-supported SLA surgical guides were more accurate than bone- or mucosa-supported SLA surgical guides.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods</subject><subject>Dental Models</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted</subject><subject>Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods</subject><subject>Jaw, Edentulous - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Models, Anatomic</subject><subject>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</subject><subject>Patient Care Planning</subject><subject>Photography, Dental</subject><subject>Statistics, Nonparametric</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgery, Computer-Assisted</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><issn>0278-2391</issn><issn>1531-5053</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkkGL1EAQhYMo7rj6BzxILnpL7OpOOh0QYZl114UFhRnPTaZS2e0xScfuZCEH_7udnaDgQelDQ9VXj6Lei6LXwFJgIN8f06PtfMoZUykrUybEk2gDuYAkZ7l4Gm0YL1TCRQln0Qvvj4wB5IV8Hp1BCUJJkJvo57Y1vcGqjS8QJ1fhHNsmFvGlaRpy1I_xfh7IL8Wt7YZppDre287euWq4n5NLcuYhlHZjgG1rxvtTx2C8m9zdo_D1ZOqgYPr4phvaKkh-bSukLoi_jJ41Vevp1fqfR9-uPu23n5PbL9c324vbBHMhxwSrTB3KvOGHgnjDhUBGGVd5zfOacchYgbJpMhQSiqwosFAoiWrgKEuQGRfn0buT7uDsj4n8qDvjkdqwDdnJaykVcKX-D3ImlFLAAshPIDrrvaNGD850lZs1ML24o496cUcv7mhW6uBOGHqzqk-Hjuo_I6sdAXi7ApUPp2tc1aPxvzkOwMNTgftw4igc7cGQ0x4N9Ui1cYSjrq359x4f_xrHNQXfaSZ_tJPrgx0atOea6d2SoyVGTDHIVJaLX9fgwxE</recordid><startdate>20090201</startdate><enddate>20090201</enddate><creator>Ozan, Oguz, DDS, PhD</creator><creator>Turkyilmaz, Ilser, DDS, PhD</creator><creator>Ersoy, Ahmet Ersan, DDS, PhD</creator><creator>McGlumphy, Edwin A., DDS, MS</creator><creator>Rosenstiel, Stephen F., BDS, MSD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090201</creationdate><title>Clinical Accuracy of 3 Different Types of Computed Tomography-Derived Stereolithographic Surgical Guides in Implant Placement</title><author>Ozan, Oguz, DDS, PhD ; Turkyilmaz, Ilser, DDS, PhD ; Ersoy, Ahmet Ersan, DDS, PhD ; McGlumphy, Edwin A., DDS, MS ; Rosenstiel, Stephen F., BDS, MSD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c536t-ca48b95f2b7e2f233c0e4285d25d021407c6ff4c3617477c78c6eed12c6916423</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods</topic><topic>Dental Models</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted</topic><topic>Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods</topic><topic>Jaw, Edentulous - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Models, Anatomic</topic><topic>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</topic><topic>Patient Care Planning</topic><topic>Photography, Dental</topic><topic>Statistics, Nonparametric</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgery, Computer-Assisted</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ozan, Oguz, DDS, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Turkyilmaz, Ilser, DDS, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ersoy, Ahmet Ersan, DDS, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McGlumphy, Edwin A., DDS, MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosenstiel, Stephen F., BDS, MSD</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ozan, Oguz, DDS, PhD</au><au>Turkyilmaz, Ilser, DDS, PhD</au><au>Ersoy, Ahmet Ersan, DDS, PhD</au><au>McGlumphy, Edwin A., DDS, MS</au><au>Rosenstiel, Stephen F., BDS, MSD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Clinical Accuracy of 3 Different Types of Computed Tomography-Derived Stereolithographic Surgical Guides in Implant Placement</atitle><jtitle>Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Oral Maxillofac Surg</addtitle><date>2009-02-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>67</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>394</spage><epage>401</epage><pages>394-401</pages><issn>0278-2391</issn><eissn>1531-5053</eissn><coden>JOMSDA</coden><abstract>Purpose Presurgical planning is essential to achieve esthetic and functional implants. The goal of this clinical study was to determine the angular and linear deviations at the implant neck and apex between planned and placed implants using stereolithographic (SLA) surgical guides. Patients and Methods A total of 110 implants were placed using SLA surgical guides generated from computed tomography (CT). All patients used the radiographic templates during CT scanning. After obtaining 3-dimensional CT scans, each implant insertion was simulated on the CT images. SLA surgical guides using a rapid prototyping method including a laser beam were used during implant insertion. A new CT scan was made for each patient after implant insertion. Special software was used to match images of the planned and placed implants, and their positions and axes were compared. Results The mean angular deviation of all placed implants was 4.1° ± 2.3°, whereas mean linear deviation was 1.11 ± 0.7 mm at the implant neck and 1.41 ± 0.9 mm at the implant apex compared with the planned implants. The angular deviations of the placed implants compared with the planned implants were 2.91° ± 1.3°, 4.63° ± 2.6°, and 4.51° ± 2.1° for the tooth-supported, bone-supported, and mucosa-supported SLA surgical guides, respectively. Conclusion The results of this study suggested that stereolithographic surgical guides using CT data may be reliable in implant placement, and tooth-supported SLA surgical guides were more accurate than bone- or mucosa-supported SLA surgical guides.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>19138616</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.joms.2008.09.033</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0278-2391
ispartof Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2009-02, Vol.67 (2), p.394-401
issn 0278-2391
1531-5053
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66812882
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Dental Implantation, Endosseous - methods
Dental Models
Dentistry
Female
Humans
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods
Jaw, Edentulous - diagnostic imaging
Male
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Models, Anatomic
Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology
Patient Care Planning
Photography, Dental
Statistics, Nonparametric
Surgery
Surgery, Computer-Assisted
Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods
title Clinical Accuracy of 3 Different Types of Computed Tomography-Derived Stereolithographic Surgical Guides in Implant Placement
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T15%3A47%3A18IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinical%20Accuracy%20of%203%20Different%20Types%20of%20Computed%20Tomography-Derived%20Stereolithographic%20Surgical%20Guides%20in%20Implant%20Placement&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20oral%20and%20maxillofacial%20surgery&rft.au=Ozan,%20Oguz,%20DDS,%20PhD&rft.date=2009-02-01&rft.volume=67&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=394&rft.epage=401&rft.pages=394-401&rft.issn=0278-2391&rft.eissn=1531-5053&rft.coden=JOMSDA&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.joms.2008.09.033&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E20388810%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=20388810&rft_id=info:pmid/19138616&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0278239108014845&rfr_iscdi=true