Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research

Clinical problems of computer-guided implant surgery

Authors: Seong-Yong Moon, Kyoung-Rok Lee, Su-Gwan Kim, Mee-Kyoung Son

Published in: Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The utilization of a cone-beam computed tomography (CT)-assisted surgical template allows for predictable results because implant placement plans can be performed in the actual surgery. In order to assess the accuracy of the CT-guided surgery, angular errors and shoulder/apex distance errors were evaluated by data fusion from before and after the placement.

Methods

Computer-guided implant surgery was performed in five patients with 19 implants. In order to analyze differences of the implant fixture body between preoperative planned implant and postoperative placed implant, angular error and distance errors were evaluated.

Results

The mean angular errors between the preoperative planned and postoperative placed implant was 3.84° ± 1.49°; the mean distance errors between the planned and placed implants were 0.45 ± 0.48 mm horizontally and 0.63 ± 0.51 mm vertically at the implant neck and 0.70 ± 0.63 mm horizontally and 0.64 ± 0.57 mm vertically at the implant apex for all 19 implants.

Conclusions

It is important to be able to utilize these methods in actual clinical settings by improving the various problems, including the considerations of patient mouth opening limitations, surgical guide preparation, and fixation.
Literature
4.
go back to reference Klein M, Abrams M (2001) Computer-guided surgery utilizing a computer-milled surgical template. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 13:165–9–quiz 170 Klein M, Abrams M (2001) Computer-guided surgery utilizing a computer-milled surgical template. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 13:165–9–quiz 170
9.
go back to reference Hoffmann J, Westendorff C, Gomez-Roman G, Reinert S (2005) Accuracy of navigation-guided socket drilling before implant installation compared to the conventional free-hand method in a synthetic edentulous lower jaw model. Clin Oral Implants Res 16:609–614. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01153.x CrossRefPubMed Hoffmann J, Westendorff C, Gomez-Roman G, Reinert S (2005) Accuracy of navigation-guided socket drilling before implant installation compared to the conventional free-hand method in a synthetic edentulous lower jaw model. Clin Oral Implants Res 16:609–614. doi:10.​1111/​j.​1600-0501.​2005.​01153.​x CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Nickenig H-J, Wichmann M, Hamel J et al (2010) Evaluation of the difference in accuracy between implant placement by virtual planning data and surgical guide templates versus the conventional free-hand method—a combined in vivo – in vitro technique using cone-beam CT (Part II). J Craniomaxillofac Surg 38:488–493. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2009.10.023 CrossRefPubMed Nickenig H-J, Wichmann M, Hamel J et al (2010) Evaluation of the difference in accuracy between implant placement by virtual planning data and surgical guide templates versus the conventional free-hand method—a combined in vivo – in vitro technique using cone-beam CT (Part II). J Craniomaxillofac Surg 38:488–493. doi:10.​1016/​j.​jcms.​2009.​10.​023 CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Clinical problems of computer-guided implant surgery
Authors
Seong-Yong Moon
Kyoung-Rok Lee
Su-Gwan Kim
Mee-Kyoung Son
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 2288-8586
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40902-016-0063-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 1/2016 Go to the issue