WATCH THE RECORDING ON DEMAND | 1 CE Credit Available
Several methods have been described to improve the accuracy of implant positioning. Studies have confirmed the superiority of guided implant placement over freehand implant placement. The alignment of a CBCT dataset and the digital image of a diagnostic wax-up in CAD planning software allows the clinician to virtually plan the implant position in three dimensions. Surgical templates are used according to different protocols defined by the degree of guidance. The pilot protocol uses the template only for the initial drill. The half-guided protocol uses the template for all osteotomies, only implant placement is performed without the template.
Finally, the fully-guided protocol uses the template during the complete drilling sequence as well as for implant placement. If the positioning of the surgical guide is accurate, the half-guided surgical protocol cannot completely eliminate implant placement inaccuracy, given that the final step, insertion, is unguided. There is no clear recommendation in the literature as to whether the clinician can achieve higher accuracy with a surgical motor or a torque wrench. The aim of this lecture is to compare the accuracy of implant placement performed either with a surgical motor or a torque wrench as part of a half-guided surgical protocol. Furthermore, accuracy compared to fully guided protocols will be assessed, as well as duration of implant insertion and maximum insertion torque.
- Understand guided surgery protocols
- Learn about the pitfalls of using 3D printed stents
- Understand the risks associated with guided implant surgery
- Understand the benefits of various implant insertion protocols
- Choose the right tool for implant insertion