Abstract
Abstract
Aims
The primary aim of the present study was to measure the discrepancy between the virtual and the actual position of the single-unit implants placed via a digitally-designed fully-guided surgical template using a flapless surgical technique. Prefabricated provisional restorations and periodontal factors were evaluated after the immediate loading of implants and 3 months after the surgery, respectively.
Materials and methods
Fourteen implants in nine patients were virtually planned after importing intraoral scans and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) records into 3D planning software. Accordingly, fully-guided surgical templates, customized abutments, and provisional restorations were designed and fabricated. The implant position after the surgery was compared with its virtual counterpart in terms of angular and apical linear deviations. Implants were immediately loaded after the surgery, and the occlusal level of the delivered provisional restorations was compared with their designed positions. Early implant failure, bleeding on probing, and peri-implant pockets were documented on the 3-month follow-up.
Results
A mean angular deviation of 5.07 ± 2.06° and a mean apical linear deviation of 1.74 ± 0.63 mm resulted. Two out of 14 implants failed within the first 3 months of the surgery, and the occlusal level difference was calculated for nine prefabricated provisional restorations.
Conclusions
DIONAVI protocol has been evaluated regarding its accuracy, and an estimation of the expected deviation is presented to the clinicians using this protocol. However, before widespread use, immediate-loading protocols and provisional restorations must be studied further.
Trial registration
IRCT, IRCT20211208053334N1. Registered 6 August 2022.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference36 articles.
1. Brodala N (2009) Flapless surgery and its effect on dental implant outcomes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24(Suppl):118–125
2. Fortin T, Bosson JL, Isidori M, Blanchet E (2006) Effect of flapless surgery on pain experienced in implant placement using an image-guided system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 21(2):298–304
3. Kumar D, Sivaram G, Shivakumar B, Kumar T (2018) Comparative evaluation of soft and hard tissue changes following endosseous implant placement using flap and flapless techniques in the posterior edentulous areas of the mandible-a randomized controlled trial. Oral Maxillofac Surg 22(2):215–223
4. Llamas-Monteagudo O, Girbés-Ballester P, Viña-Almunia J, Peñarrocha-Oltra D, Peñarrocha-Diago M (2017) Clinical parameters of implants placed in healed sites using flapped and flapless techniques: A systematic review. Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal 22(5):e572–e581
5. Maier FM (2016) Initial Crestal Bone Loss After Implant Placement with Flapped or Flapless Surgery-A Prospective Cohort Study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 31(4):876–883