Dataset Information

Suggested mesiodistal distance for multiple implant placement based on the natural tooth crown dimension with digital design.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The purpose of this investigation was to identify a mesiodistal algorithm for multiple posterior implant placement based upon an ideal prosthetically restoration design.

Methods

One hundred one cases of posterior free-end edentulous arches were selected for digital crown designs and measurements. Cone bean computed tomogram and digital fabricated crown were applied. DICOM files were exported to a viewer software (BlueSkyPlan4) to generate digital crown and measurement. The mesiodistal space between roots of adjacent teeth and center of the potential implant horizontally, from both cross-section and coronal plane were measured. Comparisons were performed using t-tests.

Results

No significant difference was found in the distances of the maxillary and mandibular posterior implants to adjacent natural teeth (p > 0.05). For interdental/implant distances, premolars are around 4.2 mm and molars are 5.4 mm, correspondently. The second premolar interimplant distance is around 7-7.4 mm. The distance of interimplant of the first molar is about 8-8.5 mm. For the maxillary second molar, the interimplant distance is 9.26 ± 0.29 mm and the mandibular second molar interimplant distance is 9.58 ± 0.19 mm, which is significantly different. No difference was found between the two different measurement methods.

Conclusion

A mesiodistal algorithm of 4-4.6 (implant to adjacent canine tooth), 7-7.4, 8-8.5, and 9-9.5 mm was recommended for interimplant/tooth distance from first premolar to second molar when placing implants with or without case-specific prosthetic planning prior to surgery.

SUBMITTER: Liu W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10087941 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Suggested mesiodistal distance for multiple implant placement based on the natural tooth crown dimension with digital design.

Liu Wenwen W Zhu Fangyu F Samal Ankita A Wang Hom-Lay HL

Clinical implant dentistry and related research 20220930 6

<h4>Purpose</h4>The purpose of this investigation was to identify a mesiodistal algorithm for multiple posterior implant placement based upon an ideal prosthetically restoration design.<h4>Methods</h4>One hundred one cases of posterior free-end edentulous arches were selected for digital crown designs and measurements. Cone bean computed tomogram and digital fabricated crown were applied. DICOM files were exported to a viewer software (BlueSkyPlan4) to generate digital crown and measurement. The ...[more]

PMID: 36181233

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of the present study is to evaluate the accuracy of a digital template on the three-dimensional accuracy of edentulous implantation through a retrospective study to provide more clinical evidence for the use of digital templates in edentulous patient.Materials and methodsThis study evaluates the efficacy of a digital surgical template in edentulous jaws, comparing preoperative plans with postoperative outcomes across four metrics: platform, apex, depth, and angular deviations. Utilizing a patient with an edentulous maxilla as a case study, this research employs CBCT for preoperative and postoperative assessments, with deviations analyzed via 3-Shape software. Comparing these deviations with average deviations in lierature.ResultsThe average platform deviations at positions 12, 14, 16, 22, 24, 26 were 0.98 ± 0.03 mm, 1.43 ± 0.02 mm, 1.27 ± 0.04 mm, 1.35 ± 0.03 mm, 1.34 ± 0.02 mm, and 1.42 ± 0.03 mm, respectively. The average apex deviations were 1.28 ± 0.02 mm, 1.39 ± 0.03 mm, 1.47 ± 0.04 mm, 1.26 ± 0.04 mm, 1.40 ± 0.04 mm, and 1.48 ± 0.03 mm, respectively, the average angular deviations were 3.50°± 0.08°, 2.87°± 0.07°, 3.49°± 0.06°, 3.36°± 0.10°, 3.41°± 0.13°, and 3.69°± 0.11°, and average depth deviations were 0.29 ± 0.03 mm, 0.26 ± 0.05 mm, 0.59 ± 0.05 mm, 0.28 ± 0.04 mm, 0.47 ± 0.02 mm, 0.53 ± 0.03 mm. Compared with a total mean deviation of 1.2 mm (1.04 mm to 1.44 mm) of platform deviation, 1.4 mm (1.28 mm to 1.58 mm) of apex deviation, angular deviation of 3.5°(3.0° to 3.96°) and depth deviation of 0.2 mm (-0.25 mm to 0.57 mm) reported in literature. While all measured deviations fell within clinically acceptable limits, certain parameters exceeded the benchmarks, suggesting areas for improvement in digital surgical planning and execution.ConclusionsThis study indicates that while all measured deviations fell within clinically acceptable limits, certain parameters exceeded the benchmarks, suggesting areas for improvement in digital surgical planning and execution. Based on these data, the potential of digital guide plates to fulfill precision requirements in edentulous jaw implantation can be proved, contributing valuable insights into the optimization of implant surgery protocols.Clinical relevanceNow, the digital template is accepted by many doctors. However, clinical research has not thoroughly verified whether the new digital technology is more accurate than traditional technology. So, this study aims to explore the effect of a whole-process digital template on edentulous implantation and provide more clinical evidence.

Project description: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.

Dataset Information

Suggested mesiodistal distance for multiple implant placement based on the natural tooth crown dimension with digital design.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Suggested mesiodistal distance for multiple implant placement based on the natural tooth crown dimension with digital design.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets