Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 15, 2025
10:42
A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
6.4K
Clinical and Radiographic Assessment of Milled Versus 3D-Printed Patient-Specific Subperiosteal Implants for Atrophic
Saad A Darwish1, Wael A El-Mohandes1, Bahaa El-Din Abd Rabbo1
1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Ahzar University, Cairo, EGY.
Cureus
|April 10, 2025
Summary
Both milling and 3D printing effectively create patient-specific subperiosteal implants for mandibular rehabilitation. These techniques offer comparable clinical and radiographic outcomes for atrophic mandibles.
Area of Science:
- Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
- Biomaterials Engineering
- Dental Implantology
Background:
- Severely atrophic mandibles present challenges for dental implant rehabilitation.
- Patient-specific subperiosteal implants offer a tailored solution for complex mandibular anatomy.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patient-specific subperiosteal implants fabricated using milling versus 3D printing.
- To evaluate implant survival, bone resorption, and placement accuracy in mandibular rehabilitation.
Main Methods:
- Twenty patients with atrophic mandibles received custom implants made by CAD/CAM milling or 3D printing.
- Implant fabrication utilized titanium grade 4 via subtractive or additive manufacturing.
- Outcomes assessed included implant survival, bone resorption, placement accuracy, and soft tissue dehiscence up to 12 months.
Main Results:
- No statistically significant differences were found between milling and 3D printing groups in implant survival (P=0.869).
- Bone resorption and angular deviations in implant placement showed no significant differences between the groups (P>0.05).
- Soft tissue dehiscence and treatment duration were comparable between the two fabrication methods.
Conclusions:
- Both milling and 3D printing are effective and comparable methods for fabricating patient-specific subperiosteal implants for atrophic mandibles.
- The choice between milling and 3D printing should consider available resources and clinician expertise.
