A comparison of accuracy among different approaches of statics‐guided implant placement in patients treated with mandibular reconstruction: A retrospective study
Yi‐Fan Kang, Yan‐Jun Ge, Meng‐Kun Ding, Jian‐Feng Liu‐Fu, Zhi‐Gang Cai, Xiao‐Feng Shan- Oral Surgery
Abstract
Objective
This study aimed to evaluate the differences in the accuracy of immediate intraoral, immediate extraoral, and delayed dental implant placement with surgical guides (static computer‐aided implant surgery) in patients treated with mandibular reconstruction.
Methods
This was a retrospective study. The patients were divided into three groups: immediate intraoral placement (IIO), immediate extraoral placement (IEO), and delayed placement (DEL). Four variables were used to compare the planned and actual implant positions: angular deviation, three‐dimensional (3D) deviation at the entry point of the implant, 3D deviation at the apical point of the implant, and depth deviation.
Results
The angular deviation was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .05) and DEL (p < .05) groups. The 3D deviation at the entry point was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .05) and DEL (p < .01) groups. The 3D deviation at the apical point was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .01) and DEL (p < .01) groups. The depth deviation was significantly higher in the IIO group than in the IEO (p < .05) and DEL (p < .05) groups. There was no statistical difference between the IEO and DEL group in angular and 3D deviation.
Conclusion
With surgical guides, among the different approaches for implant placement, delayed implant placement remains the most accurate approach for patients treated with mandibular reconstruction.