Conventional Versus Computer Aided Implantology

Introduction:

The use stereolithographic (SLA) guides may provide significant benefits in simultaneous placement of multiple implants, especially in large edentulous areas lacking anatomic landmarks for surgical reference. Planning of the implant positions prior to surgery may shorten the duration of the surgery spent by exploring and determining the suitable implant location on the edentulous alveolar crest in the standard technique . Previous studies have demonstrated the use of many SLA guide in this manner, however; most were designed to be used as placed on the alveolar crest (bone-supported) following a flap exposure, and there was no depth-control of the osteotomy drills. Further advances in stereolithography allowed flapless surgeries to be performed via mucosa-supported guides (Rosenfeld, et al. 2006c, Tardieu, et al. 2007). The use of these guides eliminates not only the time required for incision and flap exposure but post-operative patient morbidity and discomfort may also be reduced, due to the non-invasive nature of the procedure. The aim of this study is to investigate the accuracy, surgical and post-operative complications and post-loading outcomes of implants placed by the conventional and aforementioned computer-aided methods.