A retrospective study of the accuracy of template-guided versus freehand implant placement: A nonradiologic method.


Danube Private University, Krems-Stein, Austria. Electronic address: [Email]


OBJECTIVE : The aim of this retrospective case study was to evaluate implant placement accuracy in inexperienced clinicians with use of a surgical guide template vs the freehand method for preoperatively planned implant position.
METHODS : Oral implant therapy was performed by inexperienced dental practitioners (<20 implants placed) on eligible patients after cone beam computer tomography (CBCT)-based software planning. Two patients' groups were formed according to the surgical technique: guided and freehand implant placement. The casts used for the fabrication of reconstructions were scanned by using a 3-dimensional (3D) laser scanner, the implant positions were superimposed with preoperative planning data, and the 3D deviations were calculated.
RESULTS : Twenty adult patients were included in this retrospective study (20 guided and 21 freehand implant placements). Mean calculated deviations with use of a surgical guide template were significantly lower compared with those of the freehand method with regard to angulation (P = .002), apical position (P = .002), and basal position (P = .012). No significant differences in implant placement accuracy were detected between the groups according to the implant position (premolars/molars; upper jaw/lower jaw) (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS : Computer-aided planning and the use of surgical guides in accordance with CBCT images may help inexperienced clinicians to place implants with high accuracy.