Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 11, 2025
Designing CAD/CAM Surgical Guides for Maxillary Reconstruction Using an In-house Approach
Published on: August 24, 2018
An in vivo study to assess and compare the angular, linear, and depth deviation as well as the difference in bone
Shipra Aggarwal1, Sumit Aggarwal1, Roma Goswami1
1Department of Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, Subharti Dental College, Swami Vivekanand Subharti University, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Aim:
The aim is to assess and compare angular, linear, and depth deviation and difference in bone density of dental implants placed using computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) fabricated surgical guides versus implants placed using Bone Pen Kit. Till now, no original research exists in the search engines such as Pubmed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Research Gate on this kit.
Settings And Design:
In vivo- Randomised control trial.
Materials And Methods:
Twenty clinical cases were selected and split into two distinct groups. Group 1 involved the placement of 10 implants using CAD/CAM fabricated three dimensional guides and Group 2 involved the placement of 10 implants using Bone Pen Kit. Four deviation parameters were evaluated, which included: (a) Angular deviation, (b) Linear deviation at implant platform, (c) Linear deviation at implant apex, and (d) Depth deviation and difference in bone density before and after implant placement was also evaluated.
Statistical Analysis Used:
SPSS software version 23 was utilized for the analysis of the data. The comparison was made using the Whitney test, and Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Results:
When comparing angular deviation, the results indicated a statistically significant difference with a P < 0.05. The values observed for angular and linear deviation in Group 2 were significantly greater than those in Group 1. No statistically significant difference in depth and linear deviation was found at the implant platform among the two groups. Bone density before and after implant placement was significantly higher in Group 1.
Conclusions:
(1) Angular and linear deviation at the apex in Group 2 exhibited higher values in comparison to Group 1, (2) No difference in depth and linear deviation at the implant platform was found among the two groups, and (3) There was no difference in change in bone density among two groups.
