A Survey of Surgeons' Satisfactory Level on Using Zero-Setup Implant Surgical Guide System

Il-Sub Ahn; Hyun-Seung Shin; Pham Doung Hieu; In-Woo Cho; Jung-Chul Park

doi:10.32542/implantology.2022021

All Issue

2022 Vol.26, Issue 4 Next Page

Original Article

A Survey of Surgeons' Satisfactory Level on Using Zero-Setup Implant Surgical Guide System

31 December 2022. pp. 209-221

PDF XML

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the user experience regarding template fabrication and dental implant surgery of a model-free, zero-setup static computer-guided surgery (CGS) system.

Materials and Methods: A survey consisting of 15 questions regarding the accuracy and convenience of the implant planning software was conducted from June 2020 to January 2021 at Dankook University Dental Hospital on six surgeons who had experience with the CGS system.

Results: Regarding the question about the convenience of registering cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) data and surgical template in the planning software, 54.5% of surgeons answered “slightly convenient”. The responses to the question about the accuracy of the process of matching the CT data and the surgical template were “very accurate” and “slightly accurate” at 45.5%, respectively. As part of the surgical procedure, when questioned about the level of fitness after the template was installed, 72.7% answered that the movement was “adequate”. The answer that the amount of coolant through the irrigation hole was “slightly insufficient” during implant placement, accounted for 45.5% of the response. Regarding the subjective feeling about the accuracy of the implant after surgery, approximately 91.9% answered that it was “very accurate”.

Conclusion: The satisfaction level regarding the ease of planning and implant surgery and that with post-implantation accuracy was high.

Keywords

Computer-assisted

Dental implants

Stereolithography

Surgery

Survey and questionnaire

References

Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1981;10:387-416. 10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-46809663

Becker W, Sennerby L, Bedrossian E, Becker BE, Lucchini JP. Implant stability measurements for implants placed at the time of extraction: a cohort, prospective clinical trial. J Periodontol 2005;76:391-7. 10.1902/jop.2005.76.3.39115857073

Schwarz F, Derks J, Monje A, Wang HL. Peri-implantitis. J Clin Periodontol 2018;45:S246-S66. 10.1111/jcpe.1295429926484

Orentlicher G, Abboud M. Guided surgery for implant therapy. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2011;23:239-56. 10.1016/j.coms.2011.01.00821492799

Park JM, Kim J, Shim JS. Review of Computer-assisted Implant Surgeries: Navigation Surgery System vs. Computer-guided Implant Template vs. Robot. Implantology 2018;22:50-8. 10.32542/implantology.20180005

Park JM, Yi TK, Koak JY, Kim SK, Park EJ, Heo SJ. Comparison of five-axis milling and rapid prototyping for implant surgical templates. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:374-83. 10.11607/jomi.326524683563

Nickenig HJ, Wichmann M, Hamel J, Schlegel KA, Eitner S. 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 2010;38:488-93. 10.1016/j.jcms.2009.10.02319939691

Fortin T, Champleboux G, Bianchi S, Buatois H, Coudert JL. Precision of transfer of preoperative planning for oral implants based on cone-beam CT-scan images through a robotic drilling machine: An in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:651-6. 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130612.x12519341

Koop R, Vercruyssen M, Vermeulen K, Quirynen M. Tolerance within the sleeve inserts of different surgical guides for guided implant surgery. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013;24:630-4. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02436.x22413853

Ruppin J, Popovic A, Strauss M, Spüntrup E, Steiner A, Stoll C. Evaluation of the accuracy of three different computer-aided surgery systems in dental implantology: optical tracking vs. stereolithographic splint systems. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:709-16. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01430.x18492085

Tahmaseb A, Wismeijer D, Coucke W, Derksen W. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:25-42. 10.11607/jomi.2014suppl.g1.224660188

Valente F, Schiroli G, Sbrenna A. Accuracy of computer-aided oral implant surgery: a clinical and radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:234-42. 19492638

Lee JW. Computer-guided flapless implant surgery and immediate loading with customized restoration, comparing and reviewing error of guided surgery. Implantology 2017;21:225-49. 10.32542/implant.20170018

Schnutenhaus S, Gröller S, Luthardt RG, Rudolph H. Accuracy of the match between cone-beam computed tomography and model scan data in template-guided implant planning: a prospective controlled clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2018;20:541-9. 10.1111/cid.1261429691987

Kaisarly D, Gezawi ME. Polymerization shrinkage assessment of dental resin composites: a literature review. Odontology 2016;104:257-70. 10.1007/s10266-016-0264-327540733

Hultin M, Svensson KG, Trulsson M. Clinical advantages of computer-guided implant placement: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:124-35. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02545.x23062137

Hur B, Oh KC, Shim JS, Park JM. Use of model-free and zero-setup computer-guided implant surgical template for partial edentulous cases. Implantology 2019;23:220-8. 10.32542/implantology.2019019

Song YW, Kim J, Kim JH, Park JM, Jung UW, Cha JK. Accuracy of dental implant placement by a novel in-house model-free and zero-setup fully guided surgical template made of a light-cured composite resin (VARO Guide^®): a comparative in vitro study. Materials (Basel) 2021;14:402-3. 10.3390/ma1414402334300944PMC8304558

Behneke A, Burwinkel M, Behneke N. Factors influencing transfer accuracy of cone-beam CT-derived template-based implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23:416-23. 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02337.x22092586

Chacon GE, Bower DL, Larsen PE, McGlumphy EA, Beck FM. Heat production by 3 implant drill systems after repeated drilling and sterilization. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006;64:265-9. 10.1016/j.joms.2005.10.01116413899

Misir AF, Sumer M, Yenisey M, Ergioglu E. Effect of surgical drill guide on heat generated from implant drilling. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:2663-8. 10.1016/j.joms.2009.07.05619925988

Gargallo-Albiol J, Salomó-Coll O, Lozano-Carrascal N, Wang HL, Hernández-Alfaro F. Intra-osseous heat generation during implant bed preparation with static navigation: multi-factor in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2021;32:590-7. 10.1111/clr.1372833629419

Information

Publisher :The Korean Academy of Oral & Maxillofacial Implantology
Publisher(Ko) :대한구강악안면임플란트학회
Journal Title :Journal of implantology and applied sciences
Journal Title(Ko) :대한구강악안면임플란트학회지
Volume : 26
No :4
Pages :209-221
Received Date : 2022-05-16
Revised Date : 2022-06-14
Accepted Date : 2022-06-15
DOI :https://doi.org/10.32542/implantology.2022021

Journal of implantology and applied sciences ISSN:2765-7833(Print) 2765-7841(Online) 대한구강악안면임플란트학회지

All Issue