Influence of the macrodesign of an implant and the sleeve system on the accuracy of template-guided implant placement: A prospective clinical study

Abstract

Statement of problem: Three-dimensional (3D) implant planning facilitates determining the optimal position and number of implants, in terms of function and esthetics, by taking into account adjacent structures. Template-guided implant placement is an established procedure for implementing this planning, although the accuracy between the planned and the actual implant position is subject to many influences. The influences of the macrodesign of the implants and the sleeve materials used have rarely been investigated clinically.

Purpose: The purpose of this prospective clinical study was to investigate the accuracy of template-guided implant placement according to the macrodesign of different implants and the design of the drill sleeve.

Material and methods: Implants were placed in 60 participants within 3 groups (n=20): tapered implant with a metal sleeve (T-MS), tapered implant with a polymeric sleeve (T-PS), and progressive tapered implant with a polymeric sleeve (XT-PS). After overlaying the 3D implant planning image with the postoperative intraoral scan, deviations were 2-dimensionally related to the implant shoulder (S) and the apex (A) in terms of height (2DHS/2DHA), mesiodistal (2DSmd/2DAmd) and buccolingual (2DSbo/2DAbo), as well as 3-dimensionally on the implant shoulder (3DS), on the apex (3DA), and on the axis deviation (Axis). The groups were compared by using the analysis of variance. The Tukey post hoc test was performed for normally distributed data to identify significant differences among groups (α=.05).

Results: The errors for 2DSmd and 2DSbo were 0.26 to 0.40 mm across all groups. The 3DS group varied between 0.67 and 0.87 mm. No significant differences were found in terms of the material of the sleeves or the macrodesign of the implants (P>.05). Significant differences were found for 2DHS (P=.029) and 2DHA (P=.016) between the groups with the different sleeves. Group T-PS showed the least height deviation.

Conclusions: In terms of height deviation, significant differences were found among the groups, with deviations depending on the implant type and the sleeve type. Overall, the method showed a high level of accuracy, providing good predictability of the prosthetic rehabilitation.