Digital Planning and Mucosa-supported Guided Implant Surgery: A Case Report

Year 2020, Volume: 2 Issue: Supplement 1 (Congress issue), 79 - 85, 10.09.2020

Özge Doğanay , Erdem Kılıç

Abstract

Guided implant surgery simplifies the execution of implant placement procedures and provides optimal clinical outcomes. The aim of this report was to demonstrate digital implant surgery process and to evaluate implant deviations at apex and platform. Case: A 55-year-old man with no relevant medical history and having an edentulous maxilla referred to the department of oral and maxillofacial surgery. Mucosa-supported guide and implant locations based on the desired prosthetic design was planned via Codiagnostix® software. Six implants were inserted and immediate provisional prosthesis was adapted to the maxilla. To analyze implant deviations, pre-planned image and post-operative cone beam computed tomography were superimposed. Digitally guided implant surgery is a beneficial and minimal invasive method for providing pre-treatment prosthetic evaluation and reducing intraoperative human error and surgery time. Although implant deviations were diagnosed in all implants with different degrees, final prosthetic rehabilitation was successfully achieved.

Keywords

Digital planning, guided implant surgery, hybrid prosthesis, deviations, mucosa-supported guide, cone beam computed tomography

References

• Ganz, S. D. (2008). Restoratively driven implant dentistry utilizing advanced software and CBCT: realistic abutments and virtual teeth. Dent Today, 27(7), 122, 124, 126‐127. Jacobs, R. (2003) Preoperative radiologic planning of implant surgery in compromised patients. Periodontol 2000, 33,12‐25.
• Parashis, A., Diamantopoulos, P. (2008). Computer guided implant placement. Analecta Periodontol, 19, 11‐29.
• Rosenfeld, A. L, Mandelaris, G. A., Tardieu, P. B. (2006). Prosthetically directed implant placement using computer software to ensure precise placement and predictable prosthetic outcomes. Part 2: rapidprototype medical modeling and stereolithographic drilling guides requiring bone exposure. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 26(4), 347‐353.
• Schnitman, P. A., Hayashi, C., Han, R. K. (2014). Why guided when freehand is easier, quicker, and less costly? J Oral Implantol, 40(6), 670‐678.
• Tardieu, P. B, Vrielinck, L., Escolano, E., Henne, M., Tardieu, A. L. (2007). Computer‐assisted implant placement: scan template, SimPlant, SurgiGuide, and SAFE system. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 27(2), 141‐149.
• Tatakis, D. N., Chien, H. H., Parashis, A. O. (2019). Guided implant surgery risks and their prevention. Periodontol 2000, 81(1),194-208.
• Widmann, G., Bale, R. J. (2006). Accuracy in computer-aided implant surgery—a review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 21(2), 305-313.