Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 1, 2026
A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
An RCT comparing patient-centred outcome variables of guided surgery (bone or mucosa supported) with conventional
Marjolein Vercruyssen1, Antoon De Laat, Wim Coucke
1Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Medicine, Catholic University Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Aim:
To assess in a randomized study the patient-centred outcome of two guided surgery systems (mucosa or bone supported) compared to conventional implant placement, in fully edentulous patients.
Material And Methods:
Fifty-nine patients (72 jaws) with edentulous maxillas and/ or mandibles, were consecutively recruited and randomly assigned to one of the treatment groups. Outcome measures were the Dutch version of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ-DLV), the Health-related quality of life instrument (HRQOL), visual analogue scales (VAS), the duration of the procedure, and the analgesic doses taken each day.
Results:
Three hundred and fourteen implants were placed successfully. No statistical differences could be shown between treatment groups on pain response (MPQ-DLV), treatment perception (VAS) or number or kind of pain killers. For the HRQOLI-instrument, a significant difference was found between the Materialise Mucosa and Materialise Bone group at day 1 (p = 0.02) and day 2 (p = 0.01). For the duration of the surgery, a statistical difference (p = 0.005) was found between the Materialise mucosa and the Mental group, in favour of the first.
Conclusion:
In this study little difference could be found in the patient outcome variables of the different treatment groups. However there was a tendency for patients treated with conventional flapped implant placement to experience the pain for a longer period of time.
