Clinical and radiographic comparison of dental implants placed by conventional surgery and guided surgery with virtual planning
Not Applicable
- Conditions
- Other specified disorders of teeth and supporting structures.K00-K93
- Registration Number
- RBR-2h745w
- Lead Sponsor
- niversidade Federal de Santa Catarina
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Data analysis completed
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- Not specified
Inclusion Criteria
Sufficient bone structure for conventional length implants insertion, verified by CBCT; suitable mouth opening for surgical and tomographic guides, as well drill guides and drills for GVS technique; presence of both teeth adjacent to the dental element that was rehabilitated, for stabilization of the guides.
Exclusion Criteria
Anatomical limitation for dental implants placement or the need of bone grafting prior to implantation; patients with inflammatory alterations at the surgical site; limited prosthetic space that can preclude the restauration; pregnant or lactating women; presence of metabolic, hemorrhagic and relevant systemic disorders that could alter the tissues reparation.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Intervention
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method To assess the angular deviation between the planned and executed position of dental implants in two different techniques: guided virtual surgery, using a stereolithographic surgical guide, and conventional surgery, with the aid of a surgical guide made by hand.;The results of the present study reject the null hypothesis. It was possible to observe that angular deviations of the implants installed by GVS (test group) were 2.2±1.1 degrees while those installed by CS (control group) had a mean of 3.5 ± 1.6 degrees.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method To compare the linear deviation between planned and performed implants, in cervical, central and apical positions.;For the variables coronal, central and apical distances (deviations), however, the null hypothesis was accepted, that is, the means between the groups of GVS and CS were the same, statistically.;To assess the trans and post operative results of both techniques by means of a questionnaire answered by the patients.;Only nine patients who completed the survey accepted to fill the postoperative questionnaire or did it correctly. Due to the small sample size of this analysis (n=18), Fisher's exact test showed no statistical difference for any of the questions.