How much does experience in guided implant surgery play a role in accuracy? A randomized controlled pilot study. Issue 7 (July 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Cassetta, M.; Bellardini, M.
• Is Part Of: International journal of oral & maxillofacial surgery. Volume 46:Issue 7(2017:Jul.)
• Page Start: 922
• Page End: 930
• Publication Date: 2017-07
• Subjects: dental implants -- computer-assisted surgery -- clinical research -- randomized controlled trial -- positioning error; Mouth -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Maxilla -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Dentistry -- Periodicals; Dentistry, Operative; Oral Surgical Procedures; Surgery, Oral; Dentistry; Maxilla -- Surgery; Mouth -- Surgery; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 617.52059
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2017.03.010
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0901-5027

Abstract

Abstract: The current literature is not consistent on whether experience influences accuracy. The aim of this study was to analyze the accuracy of implant insertion performed by inexperienced versus experienced surgeons. Thirty-three implants were inserted by the inexperienced group and 37 implants by the experienced group. Planning and post-surgical computed tomography images were matched and the accuracy data compared. The positioning error was also evaluated. Quantitative data for the two groups were described and illustrated using box plots. The t -test was used to compare accuracy values and positioning error. Significance was set at P ≤ 0.05. In the inexperienced group, the mean coronal, apical, and angular deviation values were 0.75 mm (range 1.01–0.51, standard deviation (SD) 0.18), 1.02 mm (range 1.99–0.64, SD 0.44), and 3.07° (range 9.22–0.73, SD 2.70). In the experienced group, the mean coronal, apical, and angular deviations were 0.60 mm (range 1.00–0.06, SD 0.25), 0.67 mm (range 1.67–0.24, SD 0.34), and 3.21° (range 8.01–1.41, SD 1.57). The t -test did not show any statistically significant difference when coronal ( P = 0.125), apical ( P = 0.060), and angular ( P = 0.859) deviations were considered. A statistically significant difference ( P = 0.000) was determined when the positioning error was considered. Experience had a limited influence on accuracy, but reduced positioning error to a statistically significant degree.