A Randomized Clinical Trial on the Accuracy of Guided Implant Surgery Between Two Implant-planning Programs Used by Inexperienced Operators

Statement Of Problem: Various static implant planning software packages have been developed for the purpose of static computer-assisted implant surgery. However, how different software programs affect the accuracy of implant placement is unclear.

Purpose: The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate and examine the difference in posterior implant positioning between the planned and placed positions when inexperienced operators, following a fully guided implant surgery protocol, used 2 static implant planning software packages.

Material And Methods: Twenty-four participants who needed single posterior implant placement were randomly divided into 2 groups based on the used implant planning software program (coDiagnostiX, n=12; Implant Studio, n=12). The dataset of the placed implant position, generated by digitizing the implant impression, was superimposed on the planned implant position. The number of horizontal, angular, and vertical deviations of the placed implants were measured for each software package and statistically analyzed with the independent t test (α=.05).

Results: The coDiagnostiX group presented with a mean horizontal deviation at the entry point (DE) of 1.07 ±0.36 mm, mean angular deviation (DA) of 3.52 ±1.64 degrees, and mean depth deviation (DD) of -0.71 ±0.29 mm, while the mean DE, mean DA, and mean DD in the Implant Studio group were 0.97 ±0.33 mm, 3.77 ±2.16 degrees, and -0.84 ±0.30 mm, respectively. Statistically, no significant differences were found between coDiagnostiX and Implant Studio programs for all these results (P>.05).

Conclusions: Acceptable accuracy of implant positioning can be expected by inexperienced operators if they follow the guidelines of either of the 2 software packages. Both the coDiagnostiX and Implant Studio programs showed similar results, with a shallower than planned implant depth of 0.71 and 0.84 mm, respectively.