Accuracy of two cad-cam surgical templates

Objectives: The aim of this study is to assess the accurancy of implants placed by two stereolithographic templates, Universal SurgiGuide® and Safe SurgiGuide®(Materialise-Leuven-Belgium).Methods: At the Department of Oral Sciences of “ Sapienza” , University of Rome, were selected 20 patients who needed an implant-prosthetic rehabilitation. All patients underwent CT and axial images , in DICOM format, were imported into the software SimPlant® for the planning. 227 P1H implants(Plan 1 Health- Amaro- Udine-Italia) were inserted , in partially and completely edentulous patients, using stereolithographic templates. 116 implants were inserted using the Universal SurgiGuide ®, which allowed us to control the preparation of the implant site, while 111 implants were inserted using the Safe SurgiGuide ® and guided surgery kit, with site preparation control , depth control and implant insertion guidance system. All patients underwent a CT post-operative and the images pre- and post-operative were compared. Four deviation parameters (i.e. global, angular, depth, and lateral deviation) were defined and calculated between the planned and the placed implants. Results: The implants inserted with the Universal SurgiGuide® showed a mean global deviation of 1.46 mm(range 3.88-0.17,SD 0.68), a mean angular deviation of 5.09°(range 21.16-0.10, SD 3.69), a mean lateral deviation of 0.97mm(range 3.15-0.08, SD 0.51)and a mean depth deviation of 0.97mm(range 3.53-0.02,SD 0.70). Considering the results obtained using the Safe SurgiGuide ® templates the implants inserted showed a mean global deviation of 1.51 mm(range 3.00-0.13,SD 0.60), a mean angular deviation of 4.67°(range 15.25-0.10, SD 2.97), a mean lateral deviation of 1.19 mm(range 2.61-0.12, SD 0.63) and a mean depth deviation of 0.74mm(range 2.29-0.03,SD 0.55). Conclusion: These results, allows us to confirm the reliability of two methods of computer-assisted implant placement tested.