A preoperative planning system for oral implant surgery was developed which takes as input computed tomographies (CT's) of the jaws. Two-dimensional (2-D) reslices of these axial CT slices orthogonal to a curve following the jaw arch are computed and shown together with three-dimensional (3-D) surface rendered models of the bone and computer-aided design (CAD)-like implant models. A technique is developed for scanning and visualizing an eventual existing removable prosthesis together with the bone structures. Evaluation of the planning done with the system shows a difference between 2-D and 3-D planning methods. Validation studies measure the benefits of the 3-D approach by comparing plans made in 2-D mode only with those further adjusted using the full 3-D visualization capabilities of the system. The benefits of a 3-D approach are then evident where a prosthesis is involved in the planning. For the majority of the patients, clinically important adjustments and optimizations to the 2-D plans are made once the 3-D visualization is enabled, effectively resulting in a better plan. The alterations are related to bone quality and quantity (p < 0.05), biomechanics (p < 0.005), and esthetics (p < 0.005), and are so obvious that the 3-D plan stands out clearly (p < 0.005). The improvements often avoid complications such as mandibular nerve damage, sinus perforations, fenestrations, or dehiscences.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Verstreken et al. (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: