Search

The aim of this human cadaver study was to assess the accuracy of zygomatic/pterygoid implant placement using custom-made bone-supported laser sintered titanium templates. For this purpose, pre-surgical planning was done on computed tomography scans of each cadaver. Surgical guides were printed using direct metal laser sintering technology. Four zygomatic and two pterygoid implants were inserted in each case using the guided protocol and related tools. Post-operative computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained to evaluate deviations between the planned and inserted implants. Accuracy was measured by overlaying the real position in the post-operative CT on the virtual presurgical placement of the implant in a CT image. Descriptive and bivariate analyses of the data were performed. As a result, a total of 40 zygomatic and 20 pterygoid implants were inserted in 10 cadavers. The mean deviations between the planned and the placed zygomatic and pterygoid implants were respectively (mean ± SD): 1.69° ± 1.12° and 4.15° ± 3.53° for angular deviation. Linear distance deviations: 0.93 mm ± 1.23 mm and 1.35 mm ± 1.45 mm at platform depth, 1.35 mm ± 0.78 mm and 1.81 mm ± 1.47 mm at apical plane, 1.07 mm ± 1.47 mm and 1.22 mm ± 1.44 mm for apical depth. In conclusion, the surgical guide system showed accuracy for all the variables studied and allowed acceptable and accurate implant placement regardless of the case complexity.

The use of pterygoid implants can be an attractive alternative to sinus bone grafting in the treatment of posterior atrophic maxilla. This technique has not been widely used because of the difficulty of the surgical access, the presence of vital structures, and the prosthetic challenges. The use of dynamic computer aided implantology (DCAI) allows the clinician to utilize navigation dental implant surgery, which allows the surgeon to follow the osteotomy site and implant positioning in real time. A total of 14 patients (28 pterygoid implants and 56 intersinusal implants) were enrolled in the study for a full arch implant prosthetic rehabilitation (4 frontal implants and 2 pterygoids implants), using a dynamic navigation system. The reported accuracy of pterygoid implants inserted using DCAI was 0.72 mm at coronal point, 1.25 mm at apical 3D, 0.66 mm at apical depth, and 2.86&deg, as angular deviation. The use of pterygoid implants in lieu of bone grafting represents a valid treatment opportunity to carry out a safe, accurate, and minimally invasive surgery, while reducing treatment time and avoiding cantilevers for a full implant prosthetic rehabilitation of the upper arch.