A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Accuracy evaluation of a universal dental implant guide for simulating implantation in posterior area on dental molds. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to compare the accuracy of self-developed universal implant guide (SDG), 3D printed digital guide (DG), and free hand (FH) simulated implantation in the posterior tooth area of dental models.

Methods: Ten junior dentists were selected to place three implants in the 35, 37, and 46 tooth sites of the mandibular models (35, 36, 37, and 46 missing teeth) by using SDG, DG, and FH, and the process was repeated again to take the average value. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used to evaluate the global coronal deviation, global apical deviation, depth deviation, and angular deviation between the actual position and preoperative planned position.

Results: The coronal deviation and apical deviation of the three implant sites in the SDG group were not significantly different from those in the two other groups (>0.05). The depth deviation and angular deviation in the SDG group were smaller than those in the DG group (<0.05) and FH group (<0.05), respectively. All deviations at site 37 in the SDG group were not different from those at site 35 (>0.05), while the depth and angular deviation at site 37 in the DG group were higher than those at site 35 (<0.05).

Conclusions: The precision of the self-developed universal dental implant guide can meet the requirements of clinical posterior implantation.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11190869PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.7518/hxkq.2024.2023379DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

implant guide
8
implantation posterior
8
area dental
8
deviation
8
coronal deviation
8
apical deviation
8
depth deviation
8
deviation angular
8
angular deviation
8
sdg group
8

Similar Publications