Comparison between CBCT superimposition protocol and S.T.A.P. method to evaluate the accuracy in implant insertion in...

Area of Science:

• Dental Implantology
• Surgical Navigation
• Medical Imaging

Background:

• Static guided surgery is increasingly used for dental implant placement.
• Accurate assessment of implant positioning is crucial for successful outcomes.
• Traditional methods for accuracy assessment often rely on radiological imaging.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate and compare the accuracy of static guided surgery for implant placement.
• To assess the reliability of the non-radiological Superimposition Touch Absolute Precision (S.T.A.P.) method against CBCT superimposition.

Main Methods:

• A prospective clinical study involving 23 implants placed using static surgical templates with a flapless, post-extractive technique.
• Postoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and dental impressions were taken six months after surgery.
• Implant positions were determined using probe technology from plaster models and superimposed with preoperative data for deviation analysis.

Main Results:

• No statistically significant differences in accuracy were found between CBCT and S.T.A.P. methods at the implant platform, apex, or angle levels.
• Average deviation at the implant platform was 1.16±0.58 mm (CBCT) and 1.22±0.55 mm (S.T.A.P.).
• Average deviation at the apex was 1.48±0.98 mm (CBCT) and 1.47±0.72 mm (S.T.A.P.).

Conclusions:

• The S.T.A.P. method demonstrates comparable accuracy to CBCT superimposition for evaluating implant placement accuracy.
• This suggests the S.T.A.P. method is a reliable non-radiological alternative for assessing guided surgery outcomes.