J Korean Acad Prosthodont.  2019 Jul;57(3):219-224. 10.4047/jkap.2019.57.3.219.

Time efficiency and operator convenience of using a micro-screw in image registration for guided implant surgery

• Mai HY
• Lee DH

• KMID: 2453775
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2019.57.3.219

Abstract

PURPOSE
The image registration of radiographic image and digital surface data is essential in the computer-guided implant guide system. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of using micro-screw on the working time and convenience of operators in the process of image matching for guided implant surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A mandibular dental model was prepared in partial edentulism for Kennedy class I classification. Two micro-screws were placed on the each side of retromolar area. Radiographic and scan images were taken using computed-tomography and digital scanning. The images were superimposed by 12 operators in software in two different conditions: using remaining teeth image alone and using teeth and micro-screws images. Working time, operator convenience and satisfaction were obtained, and analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test (α=.05).
RESULTS
The working time was not statistically different between image registration conditions (P>.05); however, operator convenience and satisfaction were higher in the teeth and micro-screw assisted condition than in the teeth-alone assisted condition (P<.001).
CONCLUSION
The use of microscrew for the image registration has no effect in working time reduction, but improves operator convenience and satisfaction.

Keyword

Micro-screw; Image registration; Computer-guided implant surgery; Working time; Convenience; Satisfaction

MeSH Terms

Classification
Dental Models
Tooth

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Cone-beam computed tomography taking of study model.

• 

  Fig. 2 Image matching process in different conditions. (A) Image matching with remaining teeth alone, (B) Image matching with teeth and micro-screws.

• 

  Fig. 3 Questionnaire for evaluating the convenience and satisfaction of operators based on workflow of different matching conditions.

• 

  Fig. 4 Scatter plot of performance time and convenience to satisfaction. (A) Relation of time to satisfaction, (B) Relation convenience to satisfaction.

Reference

1. Rungcharassaeng K, Caruso JM, Kan JY, Schutyser F, Boumans T. Accuracy of computer-guided surgery: A comparison of operator experience. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114:407–413.

2. Kola MZ, Shah AH, Khalil HS, Rabah AM, Harby NM, Sabra SA, Raghav D. Surgical templates for dental implant positioning; current knowledge and clinical perspectives. Niger J Surg. 2015; 21:1–5.

3. Nickenig HJ, Eitner S. Reliability of implant placement after virtual planning of implant positions using cone beam CT data and surgical (guide) templates. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2007; 35:207–211.

4. Ganz SD. Three-dimensional imaging and guided surgery for dental implants. Dent Clin North Am. 2015; 59:265–290.

5. Gargari M, Prete V, Pujia M, Ceruso FM. Development of patient-based questionnaire about aesthetic and functional differences between over-dentures implant-supported and overdentures tooth-supported. Study of 43 patients with a follow up of 1 year. Oral Implantol (Rome). 2013; 5:86–91.

6. Schneider D, Marquardt P, Zwahlen M, Jung RE. A systematic review on the accuracy and the clinical outcome of computer-guided template-based implant dentistry. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20:73–86.

7. Van Assche N, van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M, Jacobs R. Accuracy assessment of computer-assisted flapless implant placement in partial edentulism. J Clin Periodontol. 2010; 37:398–403.

8. Lee DH, An SY, Hong MH, Jeon KB, Lee KB. Accuracy of a direct drill-guiding system with minimal tolerance of surgical instruments used for implant surgery: a prospective clinical study. J Adv Prosthodont. 2016; 8:207–213.

9. Flügge T, Derksen W, Te Poel J, Hassan B, Nelson K, Wismeijer D. Registration of cone beam computed tomography data and intraoral surface scans - A prerequisite for guided implant surgery with CAD/CAM drilling guides. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017; 28:1113–1118.

10. DE Vico G, Spinelli D, Bonino M, Schiavetti R, Pozzi A, Ottria L. Computer-assisted virtual treatment planning combined with flapless surgery and immediate loading in the rehabilitation of partial edentulies. Oral Implantol (Rome). 2012; 5:3–10.

11. Kim JE, Amelya A, Shin Y, Shim JS. Accuracy of intraoral digital impressions using an artificial landmark. J Prosthet Dent. 2017; 117:755–761.

12. Oh JH, An X, Jeong SM, Choi BH. Digital workflow for computer-guided implant surgery in edentulous patients: A case report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 75:2541–2549.

13. Widmann G, Zangerl A, Keiler M, Stoffner R, Bale R, Puelacher W. Flapless implant surgery in the edentulous jaw based on three fixed intraoral reference points and image-guided surgical templates: accuracy in human cadavers. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010; 21:835–841.

14. Lee DH. Strategic use of microscrews for enhancing the accuracy of computer-guided implant surgery in fully edentulous arches: A case history report. Int J Prosthodont. 2018; 31:262–263.

15. Mai HN, Choi SY, Lee ST, Lee DH. Optimizing accuracy in computer-guided implant surgery with a superimposition-anchor microscrew system: A clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 120:789.e1–789.e5.

16. Orentlicher G, Abboud M. Guided surgery for implant therapy. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2011; 23:239–256. v–vi.

17. Tahmaseb A, Wismeijer D, Coucke W, Derksen W. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014; 29:25–42.

18. Chen X, Yuan J, Wang C, Huang Y, Kang L. Modular preoperative planning software for computer-aided oral implantology and the application of a novel stereolithographic template: a pilot study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010; 12:181–193.

19. Jung RE, Schneider D, Ganeles J, Wismeijer D, Zwahlen M, Hämmerle CH, Tahmaseb A. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009; 24:Suppl. 92–109.

20. Hultin M, Svensson KG, Trulsson M. Clinical advantages of computer-guided implant placement: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012; 23:Suppl 6. 124–135.

21. Scherer U, Stoetzer M, Ruecker M, Gellrich NC, von See C. Template-guided vs. non-guided drilling in site preparation of dental implants. Clin Oral Investig. 2015; 19:1339–1346.