Deviation of Dental Implants Placed by Guided Implant Surgery in Bone Structures with Different Densities

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the deviations of implants with two different geometries placed with a bone -supported stereolithographic surgical template into the bone of Misch classification densities of D2, D3, and D4. Materials and Methods: Eight maxilla and eight mandible models were macrodesigned according to the jaw geometries. Bone densities of these models were created in parallel with the most frequently observed densities in the locations: D3 bone density in the anterior maxilla, D4 bone density in the posterior maxilla, D2 bone density in the anterior mandible, and D3 bone density in the posterior mandible. A bone-supported stereolithographic surgical template was prepared in accordance with the jaw models and planning and used to place 64 NobelParallel Conical Connection RP 4.3 x 13 mm and 64 NobelActive 4.3 x 13 mm implants on the models. Global deviation, lateral deviation, angular deviation, and depth deviation between planned and placed implants were calculated with Hypermesh. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyze the differences between deviation data of the study groups, and the Mann-Whitney U test was used for pairwise comparisons of groups with significant differences. Significance was evaluated as P < .05. Results: The study groups showed statistical differences in terms of global, lateral, and depth deviation (P = .017, P = .044, and P = .012, respectively); no statistical difference was detected in terms of angular deviation (P > .05). When the data of all studies were evaluated, the deviation values for all maxillary and mandibular implants were examined regardless of bone and implant type; no statistical difference was found between the arches in terms of deviation type (P > .05). Conclusion: Regardless of the macrogeometry of the dental implants placed with the guide, no significant difference was observed between the deviation values of the different bone densities they were applied to. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2023;38:268-276. doi: 10.11607/jomi.9867