Split-mouth comparison of the accuracy of computer-generated and conventional surgical guides.
Identifieur interne : 000D86 ( PubMed/Checkpoint ); précédent : 000D85; suivant : 000D87Split-mouth comparison of the accuracy of computer-generated and conventional surgical guides.
Auteurs : Nathaniel E. Farley [États-Unis] ; Kelly Kennedy ; Edwin A. Mcglumphy ; Nancy L. ClellandSource :
- The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants [ 1942-4434 ]
Descripteurs français
- KwdFr :
- Adulte, Chirurgie assistée par ordinateur (), Chirurgie assistée par ordinateur (instrumentation), Conception assistée par ordinateur, Femelle, Humains, Imagerie tridimensionnelle (), Logiciel, Mâchoire édentée (rééducation et réadaptation), Mâle, Pose d'implant dentaire endo-osseux (), Pose d'implant dentaire endo-osseux (instrumentation), Reproductibilité des résultats, Tomodensitométrie à faisceau conique.
- MESH :
- rééducation et réadaptation : Mâchoire édentée.
- instrumentation : Adulte, Chirurgie assistée par ordinateur, Conception assistée par ordinateur, Femelle, Humains, Imagerie tridimensionnelle, Logiciel, Mâle, Pose d'implant dentaire endo-osseux, Reproductibilité des résultats, Tomodensitométrie à faisceau conique.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Adult, Computer-Aided Design, Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, Dental Implantation, Endosseous (instrumentation), Dental Implantation, Endosseous (methods), Female, Humans, Imaging, Three-Dimensional (methods), Jaw, Edentulous (rehabilitation), Male, Reproducibility of Results, Software, Surgery, Computer-Assisted (instrumentation), Surgery, Computer-Assisted (methods).
- MESH :
- instrumentation : Dental Implantation, Endosseous, Surgery, Computer-Assisted.
- methods : Dental Implantation, Endosseous, Imaging, Three-Dimensional, Surgery, Computer-Assisted.
- rehabilitation : Jaw, Edentulous.
- Adult, Computer-Aided Design, Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, Female, Humans, Male, Reproducibility of Results, Software.
Abstract
Recent clinical studies have shown that implant placement is highly predictable with computer-generated surgical guides; however, the reliability of these guides has not been compared to that of conventional guides clinically. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of reproducing planned implant positions with computer-generated and conventional surgical guides using a split-mouth design.
PubMed: 23527361
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:23527361Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Split-mouth comparison of the accuracy of computer-generated and conventional surgical guides.</title><author><name sortKey="Farley, Nathaniel E" sort="Farley, Nathaniel E" uniqKey="Farley N" first="Nathaniel E" last="Farley">Nathaniel E. Farley</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><nlm:affiliation>Gundersen Lutheran Health System, LaCrosse, Wisconsin, USA.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><wicri:regionArea>Gundersen Lutheran Health System, LaCrosse, Wisconsin</wicri:regionArea><placeName><region type="state">Wisconsin</region></placeName></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Kennedy, Kelly" sort="Kennedy, Kelly" uniqKey="Kennedy K" first="Kelly" last="Kennedy">Kelly Kennedy</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mcglumphy, Edwin A" sort="Mcglumphy, Edwin A" uniqKey="Mcglumphy E" first="Edwin A" last="Mcglumphy">Edwin A. Mcglumphy</name></author><author><name sortKey="Clelland, Nancy L" sort="Clelland, Nancy L" uniqKey="Clelland N" first="Nancy L" last="Clelland">Nancy L. Clelland</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="????"><PubDate><MedlineDate>2013 Mar-Apr</MedlineDate></PubDate></date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:23527361</idno><idno type="pmid">23527361</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">000641</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">000641</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Curation">000641</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Curation">000641</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Checkpoint">000641</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Checkpoint" wicri:step="PubMed">000641</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">Split-mouth comparison of the accuracy of computer-generated and conventional surgical guides.</title><author><name sortKey="Farley, Nathaniel E" sort="Farley, Nathaniel E" uniqKey="Farley N" first="Nathaniel E" last="Farley">Nathaniel E. Farley</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><nlm:affiliation>Gundersen Lutheran Health System, LaCrosse, Wisconsin, USA.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><wicri:regionArea>Gundersen Lutheran Health System, LaCrosse, Wisconsin</wicri:regionArea><placeName><region type="state">Wisconsin</region></placeName></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Kennedy, Kelly" sort="Kennedy, Kelly" uniqKey="Kennedy K" first="Kelly" last="Kennedy">Kelly Kennedy</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mcglumphy, Edwin A" sort="Mcglumphy, Edwin A" uniqKey="Mcglumphy E" first="Edwin A" last="Mcglumphy">Edwin A. Mcglumphy</name></author><author><name sortKey="Clelland, Nancy L" sort="Clelland, Nancy L" uniqKey="Clelland N" first="Nancy L" last="Clelland">Nancy L. Clelland</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants</title><idno type="eISSN">1942-4434</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Adult</term><term>Computer-Aided Design</term><term>Cone-Beam Computed Tomography</term><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous (instrumentation)</term><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous (methods)</term><term>Female</term><term>Humans</term><term>Imaging, Three-Dimensional (methods)</term><term>Jaw, Edentulous (rehabilitation)</term><term>Male</term><term>Reproducibility of Results</term><term>Software</term><term>Surgery, Computer-Assisted (instrumentation)</term><term>Surgery, Computer-Assisted (methods)</term></keywords><keywords scheme="KwdFr" xml:lang="fr"><term>Adulte</term><term>Chirurgie assistée par ordinateur ()</term><term>Chirurgie assistée par ordinateur (instrumentation)</term><term>Conception assistée par ordinateur</term><term>Femelle</term><term>Humains</term><term>Imagerie tridimensionnelle ()</term><term>Logiciel</term><term>Mâchoire édentée (rééducation et réadaptation)</term><term>Mâle</term><term>Pose d'implant dentaire endo-osseux ()</term><term>Pose d'implant dentaire endo-osseux (instrumentation)</term><term>Reproductibilité des résultats</term><term>Tomodensitométrie à faisceau conique</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="instrumentation" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous</term><term>Surgery, Computer-Assisted</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="methods" xml:lang="en"><term>Dental Implantation, Endosseous</term><term>Imaging, Three-Dimensional</term><term>Surgery, Computer-Assisted</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rehabilitation" xml:lang="en"><term>Jaw, Edentulous</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="rééducation et réadaptation" xml:lang="fr"><term>Mâchoire édentée</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" xml:lang="en"><term>Adult</term><term>Computer-Aided Design</term><term>Cone-Beam Computed Tomography</term><term>Female</term><term>Humans</term><term>Male</term><term>Reproducibility of Results</term><term>Software</term></keywords><keywords scheme="MESH" qualifier="instrumentation" xml:lang="fr"><term>Adulte</term><term>Chirurgie assistée par ordinateur</term><term>Conception assistée par ordinateur</term><term>Femelle</term><term>Humains</term><term>Imagerie tridimensionnelle</term><term>Logiciel</term><term>Mâle</term><term>Pose d'implant dentaire endo-osseux</term><term>Reproductibilité des résultats</term><term>Tomodensitométrie à faisceau conique</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Recent clinical studies have shown that implant placement is highly predictable with computer-generated surgical guides; however, the reliability of these guides has not been compared to that of conventional guides clinically. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of reproducing planned implant positions with computer-generated and conventional surgical guides using a split-mouth design.</div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">23527361</PMID><DateCompleted><Year>2014</Year><Month>02</Month><Day>13</Day></DateCompleted><DateRevised><Year>2013</Year><Month>03</Month><Day>25</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Print"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Electronic">1942-4434</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Internet"><Volume>28</Volume><Issue>2</Issue><PubDate><MedlineDate>2013 Mar-Apr</MedlineDate></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>Split-mouth comparison of the accuracy of computer-generated and conventional surgical guides.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>563-72</MedlinePgn></Pagination><ELocationID EIdType="doi" ValidYN="Y">10.11607/jomi.3025</ELocationID><Abstract><AbstractText Label="PURPOSE" NlmCategory="OBJECTIVE">Recent clinical studies have shown that implant placement is highly predictable with computer-generated surgical guides; however, the reliability of these guides has not been compared to that of conventional guides clinically. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of reproducing planned implant positions with computer-generated and conventional surgical guides using a split-mouth design.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="MATERIALS AND METHODS" NlmCategory="METHODS">Ten patients received two implants each in symmetric locations. All implants were planned virtually using a software program and information from cone beam computed tomographic scans taken with scan appliances in place. Patients were randomly selected for computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture (CAD/CAM)-guided implant placement on their right or left side. Conventional guides were used on the contralateral side. Patients underwent operative cone beam computed tomography postoperatively. Planned and actual implant positions were compared using three-dimensional analyses capable of measuring volume overlap as well as differences in angles and coronal and apical positions. Results were compared using a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of variance and were further analyzed using a Bartlett test for unequal variance (α = .05).</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="RESULTS" NlmCategory="RESULTS">Implants placed with CAD/CAM guides were closer to the planned positions in all eight categories examined. However, statistically significant differences were shown only for coronal horizontal distances. It was also shown that CAD/CAM guides had less variability than conventional guides, which was statistically significant for apical distance.</AbstractText><AbstractText Label="CONCLUSION" NlmCategory="CONCLUSIONS">Implants placed using CAD/CAM surgical guides provided greater accuracy in a lateral direction than conventional guides. In addition, CAD/CAM guides were more consistent in their deviation from the planned locations than conventional guides.</AbstractText></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Farley</LastName><ForeName>Nathaniel E</ForeName><Initials>NE</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Gundersen Lutheran Health System, LaCrosse, Wisconsin, USA.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Kennedy</LastName><ForeName>Kelly</ForeName><Initials>K</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>McGlumphy</LastName><ForeName>Edwin A</ForeName><Initials>EA</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Clelland</LastName><ForeName>Nancy L</ForeName><Initials>NL</Initials></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D003160">Comparative Study</PublicationType><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType></PublicationTypeList></Article><MedlineJournalInfo><Country>United States</Country><MedlineTA>Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants</MedlineTA><NlmUniqueID>8611905</NlmUniqueID><ISSNLinking>0882-2786</ISSNLinking></MedlineJournalInfo><CitationSubset>D</CitationSubset><CitationSubset>IM</CitationSubset><MeshHeadingList><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D000328" MajorTopicYN="N">Adult</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D017076" MajorTopicYN="Y">Computer-Aided Design</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D054893" MajorTopicYN="N">Cone-Beam Computed Tomography</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D003758" MajorTopicYN="N">Dental Implantation, Endosseous</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000295" MajorTopicYN="N">instrumentation</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000379" MajorTopicYN="Y">methods</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D005260" MajorTopicYN="N">Female</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D006801" MajorTopicYN="N">Humans</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D021621" MajorTopicYN="N">Imaging, Three-Dimensional</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000379" MajorTopicYN="Y">methods</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D007575" MajorTopicYN="N">Jaw, Edentulous</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000534" MajorTopicYN="Y">rehabilitation</QualifierName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D008297" MajorTopicYN="N">Male</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D015203" MajorTopicYN="N">Reproducibility of Results</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D012984" MajorTopicYN="N">Software</DescriptorName></MeshHeading><MeshHeading><DescriptorName UI="D025321" MajorTopicYN="Y">Surgery, Computer-Assisted</DescriptorName><QualifierName UI="Q000295" MajorTopicYN="N">instrumentation</QualifierName><QualifierName UI="Q000379" MajorTopicYN="N">methods</QualifierName></MeshHeading></MeshHeadingList></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2013</Year><Month>3</Month><Day>26</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2013</Year><Month>3</Month><Day>26</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2014</Year><Month>2</Month><Day>14</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">23527361</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></PubmedData></pubmed><affiliations><list><country><li>États-Unis</li></country><region><li>Wisconsin</li></region></list><tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Clelland, Nancy L" sort="Clelland, Nancy L" uniqKey="Clelland N" first="Nancy L" last="Clelland">Nancy L. Clelland</name><name sortKey="Kennedy, Kelly" sort="Kennedy, Kelly" uniqKey="Kennedy K" first="Kelly" last="Kennedy">Kelly Kennedy</name><name sortKey="Mcglumphy, Edwin A" sort="Mcglumphy, Edwin A" uniqKey="Mcglumphy E" first="Edwin A" last="Mcglumphy">Edwin A. Mcglumphy</name></noCountry><country name="États-Unis"><region name="Wisconsin"><name sortKey="Farley, Nathaniel E" sort="Farley, Nathaniel E" uniqKey="Farley N" first="Nathaniel E" last="Farley">Nathaniel E. Farley</name></region></country></tree></affiliations></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV1/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000D86 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd -nk 000D86 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV1
|flux= PubMed
|étape= Checkpoint
|type= RBID
|clé= pubmed:23527361
|texte= Split-mouth comparison of the accuracy of computer-generated and conventional surgical guides.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:23527361" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a EdenteV1
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.33. |  |