Conventional Multi-Slice Computed Tomography (CT) and Cone-Beam CT (CBCT) for Computer-Aided Implant Placement. Part II: Reliability of Mucosa-Supported Stereolithographic Guides

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 907-917

  Arisan, Volkan ^a   Karabuda, Zihni Cüneyt ^a   Pişkin, Bülent ^b   Özdemir, Tayfun ^a  

^a ISTANBUL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b GULHANE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Computed tomography; Computer assisted; Cone beam; Dental implants; Deviation from the planning; Gray density; Stereolithography

Indexed keywords

TOOTH IMPLANT;

ANODONTIA; COMPUTER ASSISTED THERAPY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; MOUTH MUCOSA; PROCEDURES; TOOTH IMPLANT;

ANODONTIA; CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; DENTAL IMPLANTS; HUMANS; MOUTH MUCOSA; THERAPY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84897058852     PISSN: 15230899     EISSN: 17088208     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00435.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Arisan V, Karabuda CZ, Ozdemir T. Implant surgery using bone- and mucosa-supported stereolithographic guides in totally edentulous jaws: surgical and post-operative outcomes of computer-aided vs. standard techniques. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21:980-988.
2. Berdougo M, Fortin T, Blanchet E, Isidori M, Bosson JL. Flapless implant surgery using an image-guided system. A 1- to 4-year retrospective multicenter comparative clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2010; 12:142-152.
3. Rosenfeld AL, Mandelaris GA, Tardieu PB. Prosthetically directed implant placement using computer software to ensure precise placement and predictable prosthetic outcomes. Part 1: diagnostics, imaging, and collaborative accountability. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2006; 26:215-221.
4. Widmann G, Widmann R, Widmann E, Jaschke W, Bale RJ. In vitro accuracy of a novel registration and targeting technique for image-guided template production. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005; 16:502-508.
5. Rosenfeld AL, Mandelaris GA, Tardieu PB. Prosthetically directed implant placement using computer software to ensure precise placement and predictable prosthetic outcomes. Part 3: stereolithographic drilling guides that do not require bone exposure and the immediate delivery of teeth. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2006; 26:493-499.
6. Araki K, Maki K, Seki K, etal. Characteristics of a newly developed dentomaxillofacial X-ray cone beam CT scanner (CB MercuRay): system configuration and physical properties. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004; 33:51-59.
7. Baba R, Konno Y, Ueda K, Ikeda S. Comparison of flat-panel detector and image-intensifier detector for cone-beam CT. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2002; 26:153-158.
8. Liang X, Lambrichts I, Sun Y, etal. A comparative evaluation of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and multi-slice CT (MSCT). Part II: on 3D model accuracy. Eur J Radiol 2010; 75:270-274.
9. Al-Rawi B, Hassan B, Vandenberge B, Jacobs R. Accuracy assessment of three-dimensional surface reconstructions of teeth from cone beam computed tomography scans. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37:352-358.
10. Dhore E. Axial image conversion and segmentation. In: Tardieu PB, Rosenfeld AL, eds. Proceedings of the art of computer-guided implantology. Chicago, IL: Quintessence Publishing Co., 2009:59-66.
11. Arisan V, Karabuda ZC, Ozdemir T. Accuracy of two stereolithographic guide systems for computer-aided implant placement: a computed tomography-based clinical comparative study. J Periodontol 2010; 81:43-51.
12. Handelsman M. Surgical guidelines for dental implant placement. Br Dent J 2006; 3:139-152.
13. Van Assche N, Quirynen M. Tolerance within a surgical guide. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21:455-458.
14. Misch CE. Density of bone: effect on surgical approach and healing. In: Misch CE, ed. Proceedings of the contemporary implant dentistry. St. Louis, MO: Mosby, 1999:371-384.
15. Mori S, Endo M, Tsunoo T, etal. Physical performance evaluation of a 256-slice CT-scanner for four-dimensional imaging. Med Phys 2004; 6:1348-1356.
16. Mawlawi O, Townsende DW. Multimodality imaging: an update on PET/CT technology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36:15-29.
17. Wang J, Xing L. Iterative image reconstruction for CBCT using edge-preserving prior. Med Phys 2009; 36:36-45.
18. Arai Y, Tammisalo E, Iwai K, Hashimoto K, Shinoda K. Development of a compact computed tomographic apparatus for dental use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999; 28:245-248.
19. Loubele M, Maes F, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D, White SC, Suetens P. Comparative study of image quality for MSCT and CBCT scanners for dentomaxillofacial radiology applications. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2008; 129:222-226.
20. Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M. Comparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008; 106:106-114.
21. Dreiseidler T, Neugebauer J, Ritter L, etal. Accuracy of a newly developed integrated system for dental implant planning. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20:1191-1199.
22. Valente F, Schiroli G, Sbrenna A. Accuracy of computer-aided oral implant surgery: a clinical and radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24:234-242.
23. Van Assche N, van Steenberghe D, Guerrero ME, etal. Accuracy of implant placement based on pre-surgical planning of three-dimensional cone-beam images: a pilot study. J Clin Periodontol 2007; 34:816-821.
24. van Steenberghe D, Naert I, Andersson M, Brajnovic I, Van Cleynenbreugel J, Suetens P. A custom template and definitive prosthesis allowing immediate implant loading in the maxilla: a clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002; 17:663-670.
25. Jung RE, Schneider D, Ganeles J, etal. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24:92-109.
26. Pettersson A, Komiyama A, Hultin M, Näsström K, Klinge B. Accuracy of virtually planned and template guided implant surgery on edentate patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2010. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00285.x (Epub ahead of print).
27. Di Giacomo GA, Cury PR, de Araujo NS, Sendyk WR, Sendyk CL. Clinical application of stereolithographic surgical guides for implant placement: preliminary results. J Periodontol 2005; 76:503-507.
28. D'Haese J, Van De Velde T, Elaut L, De Bruyn H. A prospective study on the accuracy of mucosally supported stereolithographic surgical guides in fully edentulous maxillae. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2009. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00255.x (Epub ahead of print).
29. Stumpel LJ. Deformation of stereolithographically produced surgical guides: an observational case series report. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2010. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00268.x (Epub ahead of print).
30. D'haese J, De Bruyn H. Effect of smoking habits on accuracy of implant placement using mucosally supported stereolithographic surgical guides. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2011. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00353.x (Epub ahead of print).
31. Vrielinck L, Politis C, Schepers S, Pauwels M, Naert I. Image-based planning and clinical validation of zygoma and pterygoid implant placement in patients with severe bone atrophy using customized drill guides. Preliminary results from a prospective clinical follow-up study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003; 32:7-14.
32. Koong B. Cone beam imaging: is this the ultimate imaging modality? Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21:1201-1208.