Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate differences between the virtually planned and clinically achieved implant positions in completely template-guided implantations as a function of the type of edentulous space, the residual natural dentition, and the surgical implementation.
Materials and methods: Fifty-six patient cases with a total of 122 implants were evaluated retrospectively. The implantations were completely template-based. The data of the planned implant positions were overlaid with the actual clinical implant positions, followed by measurements of the 3D deviations in terms of coronal (xc) and apical distance, height (xh), and angulation (ang) and statistical analysis.
Results: The mean xc was 1.2 mm (SD 0.7 mm); the mean xa was 1.8 mm (SD 0.9 mm), the mean xh was 0.8 mm (SD 0.7 mm); and the mean ang was 4.8° (SD 3.1). The type of edentulous space and the jaw (maxilla/mandible) had no significant effect on the results in terms of implant positions. The presence of an adjacent natural tooth at the time of implantation had a significant influence on xh (p = 0.04) and ang (p = 0.05). No significant differences were found regarding the surgical approach for any of the parameters examined.
Conclusion: The results of our study are in the same range as those of other studies. Template-guided implantation offers a high degree of accuracy even in the presence of different configurations of the residual dentition or different surgical approaches. A clinical benefit is therefore present, especially from a prosthetic point of view.
Clinical relevance: The clinically achievable accuracy can be described as sufficient for further prosthetic treatment, given the intrinsic and methodological tolerances, making prosthetic rehabilitation safe and predictable.
Keywords: Accuracy; CBCT; Computer-guided surgery; Dental implant; Partially edentulous jaw; Surgical template.