» Articles » PMID: 34575295

Comparison of Dental Surface Image Registration and Fiducial Marker Registration: An In Vivo Accuracy Study of Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery

Overview
Journal J Clin Med
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2021 Sep 28
PMID 34575295
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This study compared the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) planned through dental surface image registration and fiducial marker registration. Stone models of 30 patients were converted into digital dental casts by using a desktop scanner. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was performed and superimposed to the digital dental casts with two methods: matching the dental surface images or matching the fiducial markers on a stereolithographic radiographic template. Following the implant planning, stereolithographic surgical guides were fabricated, and 56 fully guided implants were inserted by the same doctor. Deviations between planned and inserted implants were measured and compared using postoperative CBCT images. After adjustment for other potential influencing factors, compared with the fiducial marker registration group, significantly larger mean lateral deviations were noted in the dental surface registration group at both the implant platform and apex ( = 0.0188 and 0.0371, respectively). However, the mean lateral deviations for the dental surface registration (0.83 ± 0.51 mm at implant platform and 1.24 ± 0.68 mm at implant apex) were comparable to the literature. In conclusion, our findings indicate that although sCAIS planned using dental surface image registration was not statistically as accurate as that using fiducial marker registration, its accuracy was satisfactory for clinical use.

Citing Articles

Influence of template design on the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgery.

Chung J, Park J, Son H, Hong S, Pae A J Adv Prosthodont. 2025; 17(1):22-35.

PMID: 40061028 PMC: 11886405. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2025.17.1.22.


Influence of operator experience on the complete-arch accuracy and time-based efficiency of three intraoral scanners.

Lin W, Lee C, Lee S, Peng C, Lin C J Dent Sci. 2025; 20(1):620-625.

PMID: 39873045 PMC: 11762679. DOI: 10.1016/j.jds.2024.11.009.


The Application of Augmented Reality Technology in Perioperative Visual Guidance: Technological Advances and Innovation Challenges.

Shen Y, Wang S, Shen Y, Hu J Sensors (Basel). 2024; 24(22).

PMID: 39599139 PMC: 11598101. DOI: 10.3390/s24227363.


Accuracy of implant placement with computer-aided static, dynamic, and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.

Khaohoen A, Powcharoen W, Sornsuwan T, Chaijareenont P, Rungsiyakull C, Rungsiyakull P BMC Oral Health. 2024; 24(1):359.

PMID: 38509530 PMC: 10956322. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04033-y.


The Influence of Dental Virtualization, Restoration Types, and Placement Angles on the Trueness and Contact Space in 3D-Printed Crowns: A Comprehensive Exploration.

Lu T, Lin W, Yang T, Sahrir C, Shen Y, Feng S Dent J (Basel). 2024; 12(1).

PMID: 38275677 PMC: 10814425. DOI: 10.3390/dj12010002.


References
1.
Pettersson A, Komiyama A, Hultin M, Nasstrom K, Klinge B . Accuracy of virtually planned and template guided implant surgery on edentate patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010; 14(4):527-37. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00285.x. View

2.
Woo H, Mai H, Lee D . Comparison of the Accuracy of Image Registration Methods for Merging Optical Scan and Radiographic Data in Edentulous Jaws. J Prosthodont. 2020; 29(8):707-711. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13216. View

3.
Ruppin J, Popovic A, Strauss M, Spuntrup E, Steiner A, Stoll C . Evaluation of the accuracy of three different computer-aided surgery systems in dental implantology: optical tracking vs. stereolithographic splint systems. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19(7):709-16. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01430.x. View

4.
Vazquez L, Nizamaldin Y, Combescure C, Nedir R, Bischof M, Dohan Ehrenfest D . Accuracy of vertical height measurements on direct digital panoramic radiographs using posterior mandibular implants and metal balls as reference objects. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013; 42(2):20110429. PMC: 3699017. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20110429. View

5.
Vercruyssen M, Fortin T, Widmann G, Jacobs R, Quirynen M . Different techniques of static/dynamic guided implant surgery: modalities and indications. Periodontol 2000. 2014; 66(1):214-27. DOI: 10.1111/prd.12056. View