Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37596610›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2023

Does implant drill design influence the accuracy of dental implant placement using static computer-assisted implant surgery? An in vitro study.

Anna Takács, Gyula Marada, Kinga Turzó, Ákos Nagy, Orsolya Németh, Eitan Mijiritsky, Márton Kivovics, Attila Mühl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Anna TakácsDepartment of Community Dentistry, Semmelweis University, Szentkirályi utca 40, Budapest, 1088, Hungary.
Gyula MaradaDental School, Medical Faculty, University of Pécs, Tüzér utca 1, Pécs, 7623, Hungary.
Kinga TurzóDental School, Medical Faculty, University of Pécs, Tüzér utca 1, Pécs, 7623, Hungary.
Ákos NagyDental School, Medical Faculty, University of Pécs, Tüzér utca 1, Pécs, 7623, Hungary.
Orsolya NémethDepartment of Community Dentistry, Semmelweis University, Szentkirályi utca 40, Budapest, 1088, Hungary.
Eitan MijiritskyDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery and Maxillofacial Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, School of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel Aviv, 64239, Israel.
Márton KivovicsDepartment of Community Dentistry, Semmelweis University, Szentkirályi utca 40, Budapest, 1088, Hungary. kivovics.marton@semmelweis.hu.
Attila MühlDental School, Medical Faculty, University of Pécs, Tüzér utca 1, Pécs, 7623, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the accuracy of implant placement in model surgeries according to the design of the drills (straight drills or step drills) used to finalize the implant bed during pilot-guided static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS).

methodsModel surgeries were carried out on resin models randomly assigned to three study groups. Virtual planning software (coDiagnostiX 10.6, Dental Wings, Montreal, Canada) was used to plan the implant positions. In Groups 1 and 2, pilot-guided sCAIS was performed. Straight drills were used in Group 1, and step drills were used in Group 2 to finalize the implant beds. In Group 3, fully guided sCAIS was performed using a universal fully guided kit (RealGUIDE Full Surgical Kit 3DIEMME, RealGUIDE, Cantù, Como, Italy). A total of 90 dental implants (Callus Pro, Callus Implant Solutions GmbH, Nuremberg, Germany) were placed (six implants per model, five models per study group). The primary outcome variables (angular deviation, coronal global deviation, and apical global deviation) were calculated for all implants based on the comparison of the preoperative surgical plan with the postoperative scans.

resultsGroup 2 (coronal global deviation, 0.78 ± 0.29 mm; apical global deviation, 1.02 ± 0.56 mm) showed significantly lower values of both global deviation variables than Group 1 (coronal global deviation, 0.95 ± 0.20 mm; apical global deviation, 1.42 ± 0.49 mm). However, there was no significant difference in angular deviation between Groups 1 and 2 (7.56 ± 2.92° and 6.44 ± 2.84°). Group 3 produced significantly lower values of all three primary outcome variables (angular deviation, 2.36 ± 0.90°; coronal global deviation, 0.59 ± 0.28 mm; apical global deviation, 0.90 ± 0.29 mm) than Group 1 and significantly lower angular deviation and coronal global deviation values than Group 2.

conclusionsThe design of the drills used to finalize implant osteotomies during pilot-guided sCAIS influences dental implant placement accuracy. Using step drills instead of straight drills for final osteotomies decreases deviation from the surgical plan. The fully guided approach performed better than the pilot-guided sCAIS.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantationDental ImplantsSurgery, Computer-AssistedHumansResearch DesignDental ImplantsComputer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS)Dental implantImplant drillIn vitro studyStatic navigationStep drillStraight drillSurgical guide

Identifiers

PMID37596610
PMCPMC10439617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.