Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 17, 2026
3D Planning and Printing of Patient Specific Implants for Reconstruction of Bony Defects
Published on: August 4, 2020
[Clinical application of individualized three-dimensional printing implant template in multi-tooth dental
Lie Wang1, Zhi-Yuan Chen, Rong Liu
1Wuhan Puren Hospital. Wuhan 430081, Hubei Province, China.
Purpose:
To study the value and satisfaction of three-dimensional printing implant template and conventional implant template in multi-tooth dental implantation.
Methods:
Thirty cases (83 teeth) with missing teeth needing to be implanted were randomly divided into conventional implant template group (CIT group, 15 cases, 42 teeth) and 3D printing implant template group (TDPIT group, 15 cases, 41 teeth). Patients in CIT group were operated by using conventional implant template, while patients in TDPIT group were operated by using three-dimensional printing implant template. The differences of implant neck and tip deviation, implant angle deviation and angle satisfaction between the two groups were compared. The difference of probing depth and bone resorption of implant were compared 1 year after operation between the two groups. The difference of success rate and satisfaction of dental implantation were compared 1 year after operation between the two groups. SPSS19.0 software package was used for statistical analysis.
Results:
The deviation direction of the neck and the tip in disto-mesial, bucco-palatal, vertical direction and angle of implants in disto-mesial and bucco-palatal direction in TDPIT group were significantly lower than in CIT group (P<0.05), and angle satisfaction of implants in disto-mesial and bucco-palatal direction in TDPIT group were significantly higher than in CIT group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the probing depth and bone resorption of implants 1 year after operation (P>0.05). The difference of the cumulative success rate in dental implantation at 3 months and 6 months between the two groups were not significant (P>0.05), but the cumulative success rate of TDPIT group was significantly higher than CIT group at 9 months and 1 year (90.48% vs 100%,P=0.043). The patients' satisfaction rate of dental implantation in TDPIT group was significantly higher than in CIT group (86.67% vs 53.33%, P=0.046).
Conclusions:
Using three-dimensional printing implant template can obtain better accuracy of implant, higher implant success rate and better patients' satisfaction than using conventional implant template. It is suitable for clinical application.
