Digital registration versus cone-beam computed tomography for evaluating implant position: a prospective cohort study

Area of Science:

• Dental Implantology
• Medical Imaging
• Digital Dentistry

Background:

• Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) is standard for assessing postoperative implant positions but involves radiation, high costs, and potential artifacts.
• A digital registration method (DRM) has emerged as a potential alternative for evaluating implant positions.
• This study aimed to clinically verify the accuracy of DRM compared to CBCT for postoperative implant positioning.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the accuracy of a digital registration method (DRM) for determining the postoperative 3D positions of dental implants.
• To compare the accuracy of DRM with conventional cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in a clinical setting.
• To assess the applicability of DRM for both single and dual implant placements.

Main Methods:

• The study included 36 patients with 48 anterior maxillary implants, assessing positions using both CBCT and DRM.
• DRM involved obtaining intraoral scans (IOS) of dentition and scan bodies, creating a virtual model with an implant replica, and superimposing data to determine implant position.
• Accuracy was measured using Root Mean Square (RMS) values, comparing DRM-derived positions to CBCT data, with statistical analysis for single vs. dual implant groups.

Main Results:

• The overall mean RMS for DRM accuracy was 0.29 ± 0.05 mm.
• No significant difference in mean RMS was found between the single implant group (0.30 ± 0.03 mm) and the dual implant group (0.29 ± 0.06 mm, p=0.27).
• The registration accuracy between IOS and CBCT data ranged from 0.14 ± 0.05 mm to 0.21 ± 0.08 mm.

Conclusions:

• The DRM demonstrated clinically acceptable deviation ranges when compared to CBCT for 3D implant positions.
• The DRM is a viable and accurate method for assessing implant positions in both single and dual implant treatments.
• DRM offers a promising alternative to CBCT, potentially reducing radiation exposure and costs associated with implant position assessment.