Surgical Guide for Implant Placement: Effects on Implant Angulation

Surgical Guide for Implant Placement: Effects on Implant Angulation
M. CHOI1, E. ROMBERG1, and C.F. DRISCOLL2, 1 University of Maryland, Dental School, Baltimore, USA, 2 University of Maryland Dental School, Baltimore, USA
2003
IADR
Objective: This study examined the effect of a surgical guide on the accuracy of implant placement. Surgical guides varied in diameter(D), length(L), and with space(S) between the surgical guide and the simulated implant recipient site. Implant placement accuracy was evaluated by measuring the deviated angulation from the midpoint of the simulated implant recipient site. Materials and Methods: For each of the 16 combinations of surgical guide dimensions and spaces, 240 implant recipient sites were prepared. The varied dimensions and spaces were: D=2 mm, 3 mm, 4 mm, or 5 mm; L=6 mm or 9 mm; S=2 mm or 4 mm. The deviated angulations from the midpoint in mesiodistal (DAMD) and buccolingual (DABL) directions were measured using a protractor. The data was analyzed using Factorial ANOVA and Tukey's Multiple Comparison Test. Results: The DAMD at length of 9.0 mm (2.23迂1.27) was significantly smaller than at a length of 6.0 mm (3.00迂1.42, F=16.030, p見.0001). The DAMD at a space of 4.0 mm (2.13迂1.16) was significantly smaller than at a space of 2.0 mm (3.16迂1.39, F=42.232,p見.0001). A significant interaction for DAMD was found between diameter and space (F=3.072, p見0.05). For DABL, the varying diameters (F=3.550, p見.05), lengths (F=43.825, p見.0001), and spaces (F=30.579, p見.0001) showed significant differences. The DABL at a length of 9.0 mm (2.56迂1.51) was significantly smaller than that at 6.0 mm (3.82迂1.87). Significant interactions found for DABL were: diameter by length and diameter by space (F=6.784, p見0.0001, F=4.547, p見0.005). Conclusions: The diameter of a surgical guide was an initial controlling factor in minimizing deviations in implant angulation. At smaller diameters (2.0 and 3.0 mm), more errors occured as the length of the surgical guide decreased. However, with the larger diameters (4.0 and 5.0 mm), the effect of length and space were lessened.