Inter- and intraindividual variability in virtual single-tooth implant positioning.

Raabe, Clemens; Biel, Philippe; Dulla, Fabrice A; Janner, Simone F M; Abou-Ayash, Samir; Couso-Queiruga, Emilio (2024). Inter- and intraindividual variability in virtual single-tooth implant positioning. Clinical oral implants research, 35(8), pp. 810-820. Wiley 10.1111/clr.14203

Text Clinical_Oral_Implants_Res_-_2023_-_Raabe_-_Inter__and_intraindividual_variability_in_virtual_single_tooth_implant.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (1MB)

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this prospective study was to determine the inter- and intraindividual variability in virtual single-tooth implant positioning based on the level of expertise, specialty, total time spent, and the use of a prosthetic tooth setup.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Virtual implant planning was performed on matched pre- and post-extraction intraoral scans (IOS), and cone-beam computed tomography scans of 15 patients. Twelve individual examiners, involving six novices and experts from oral surgery and prosthodontics positioned the implants, first based on anatomical landmarks utilizing only the post-extraction, and second with the use of the pre-extraction IOS as a setup. The time for implant positioning was recorded. After 1 month, all virtual plannings were performed again. The individual implant positions were superimposed to obtain 3D deviations using a software algorithm.

RESULTS

An interindividual variability with mean angular, crestal, and apical positional deviations of 3.8 ± 1.94°, 1.11 ± 0.55, and 1.54 ± 0.66 mm, respectively, was found. When assessing intraindividual variability, deviations of 3.28 ± 1.99°, 0.78 ± 0.46, and 1.12 ± 0.61 mm, respectively, were observed. Implants planned by experts exhibited statistically lower deviations compared to those planned by novices. Longer planning times resulted in lower deviations in the experts' group but not in the novices. Oral surgeons demonstrated lower crestal, but not angular and apical deviations than prosthodontists. The use of a setup only led to minor adjustments.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial inter- and intraindividual variability exists during implant positioning utilizing specialized software planning. The level of expertise and the time invested influenced the deviations of the implant position during the planning sequence.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

1 since deposited on 16 Nov 2023
1 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item