Use of Additive Manufacturing in Surgical Tools/Guides for Dental Implants

Deswal, Himanshu; Kapoor, Anoop; Sehgal, Komal; Grover, Vishakha

doi:10.1201/9781003301066-4

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 The anatomic radiographic fidelity of bone structures and the accuracy of linear measurements are pivotal for primary preoperative implant planning and even more so when applied in guided implant surgery imaging. 13 Guided surgery systems are not perfectly precise, which can cause deviations in both horizontal and vertical directions from the planned implant site to the virtual position before the surgery. 14 A plethora of CBCT machines are available in the dental market.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Precision of All-on-Four Implant Position Recorded from Three Different CBCT Machines

Alsulimani,

Alhaddad,

Altassan

et al. 2024

Eur J Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To investigate the dimensional discrepancy and degree of deviation of All-on-Four implant position between different cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) machines. Materials and Methods Four implants (4.5 × 10 mm Superline II, Dentium, South Korea) were placed in an All-on-Four style in an artificial mandible. The jaw was radiated 30 times using three different CBCT machines (Rainbow CT, Dentium; Veraview X800, Morita, Japan; Planmeca Viso G3, Planmeca OY, Finland). A total of 30 Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) files were exported, n = 10. All-on-Four implants from each DICOM file were segmented and exported as an STL file (three-dimensional image) using Blue Sky Plan software (version 4.12.13/Blue Sky Bio, United States). All-on-Four implant zone dimensions (X, Y, and Z axes) and the total degree of deviation between All-on-Four implants per CBCT machine were measured using Autodesk Meshmixer software (version 3.5.474/California, United States). The data distribution's normality and variances' equality were tested with Shapiro–Wilk's and Levene's tests, respectively (p-value < 0.05). Data were analyzed using Brown–Forsythe one-way analysis of variance and Tamhane's post hoc tests to compare the differences between the groups (p-value <0.05). Results The respective X, Y, and Z mean dimensions of the All-on-Four implant zone were: Dentium (34.95, 14.71, and 9.97); Morita (34.88, 14.74, and 10.56); and Planmeca (34.73, 15.15, and 12.33). Significant differences between CBCT machines were found in all axes (p-value < 0.05); however, the Z-axis had the most differences. Notably, Planmeca exhibited the highest standard deviation (SD) in all axes (0.16–0.35), exhibiting the lowest consistency in the CBCT machines' readings. The Dentium exhibited the lowest deviation in the implant position, with the lowest SD (0.61). A significant difference in the total degree of deviation was spotted when only Morita was included in the comparison (p-value < 0.05). Conclusion This study's findings are of significant importance as they reveal that the implant position recorded from the CBCT machines was most discrepant in the buccolingual dimension (Z-axis). Planmeca exhibited the least implant-dimensional accuracy of the CBCT machines, while Dentium exhibited the highest implant position accuracy. These results could significantly impact the choice of CBCT machine for implant placement, especially since an accurate CBCT image is crucial for digital implant planning.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Precision of All-on-Four Implant Position Recorded from Three Different CBCT Machines

Alsulimani,

Alhaddad,

Altassan

et al. 2024

Eur J Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Custom Implants and Beyond: The Biomedical Potential of Additive Manufacturing

Ashish Kumar,

Amit,

Abhishek

et al. 2024

Arch Case Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Additive manufacturing, commonly known as 3D printing, is revolutionizing the field of biomedical engineering by enabling the creation of custom implants tailored to individual patient anatomy. This technology uses digital design files to layer-by-layer build structures from various materials, including biocompatible metals, polymers, and ceramics. In medical applications, this precision allows for the creation of implants that closely match the contours and geometries of a patient’s unique anatomical features, offering improved fit, functionality, and comfort compared to traditional, mass-produced implants. The potential benefits extend beyond just enhanced patient outcomes. With additive manufacturing, healthcare providers can reduce surgical times by designing implants that require minimal intraoperative modification. Moreover, the flexibility of this technology facilitates rapid prototyping and iterative design, enabling healthcare professionals to collaborate with engineers in refining implant designs before they are used in surgery. This iterative approach is particularly useful in complex cases, such as craniofacial reconstruction, where conventional implants may not adequately address the intricacies of a patient’s skeletal structure.

show abstract

Use of Additive Manufacturing in Surgical Tools/Guides for Dental Implants

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

The Precision of All-on-Four Implant Position Recorded from Three Different CBCT Machines

The Precision of All-on-Four Implant Position Recorded from Three Different CBCT Machines

Custom Implants and Beyond: The Biomedical Potential of Additive Manufacturing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About