Treffer: Integration of unilateral tooth mucosa-supported retentive surgical guide design in implant guided surgery: an in-vitro study.

Title:
Integration of unilateral tooth mucosa-supported retentive surgical guide design in implant guided surgery: an in-vitro study.
Authors:
Elnadoury EA; Department of Oral Medicine, Oral Periodontology, Oral Diagnosis and Oral radiology Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Champollion Street, Alexandria, Azarita, 002034868066, Egypt. esraa.anwer@alexu.edu.eg., Gaweesh YS; Department of Oral Medicine, Oral Periodontology, Oral Diagnosis and Oral Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt., Abu El Sadat SM; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain-Shams University, Cairo, Egypt., Abd-Ellah ME; Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Source:
BMC oral health [BMC Oral Health] 2025 Dec 11; Vol. 26 (1), pp. 93. Date of Electronic Publication: 2025 Dec 11.
Publication Type:
Journal Article; Comparative Study
Language:
English
Journal Info:
Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101088684 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1472-6831 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14726831 NLM ISO Abbreviation: BMC Oral Health Subsets: MEDLINE
Imprint Name(s):
Original Publication: London : BioMed Central, [2001-
References:
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024 Mar;35(3):294-304. (PMID: 38112164)
Materials (Basel). 2021 Jan 29;14(3):. (PMID: 33572781)
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Sep;28(9):1113-1118. (PMID: 27440381)
BMC Oral Health. 2023 Nov 30;23(1):948. (PMID: 38036982)
J Chin Med Assoc. 2018 Nov;81(11):970-976. (PMID: 30369404)
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Nov;30(11):1067-1075. (PMID: 31381178)
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 Sep-Oct;29(5):1071-8. (PMID: 25216132)
PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e49585. (PMID: 23185372)
J Oral Implantol. 2022 Oct 1;48(5):351-357. (PMID: 34937081)
Int J Implant Dent. 2022 Dec 13;8(1):65. (PMID: 36512162)
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013 Feb;42(2):264-75. (PMID: 22789635)
J Oral Implantol. 2012 Oct;38(5):643-52. (PMID: 21905915)
J Prosthodont. 2022 Feb;31(2):155-164. (PMID: 33904640)
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Oct;29 Suppl 16:416-435. (PMID: 30328191)
J Prosthodont. 2022 Dec;31(9):791-798. (PMID: 35067993)
Int J Oral Implantol (Berl). 2023 May 9;16(2):117-132. (PMID: 37158181)
J Prosthet Dent. 2024 Nov;132(5):986-993. (PMID: 36372586)
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2020 Mar;32(2):161-170. (PMID: 31916380)
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2020 Sep/Oct;35(5):931-938. (PMID: 32991643)
Periodontol 2000. 2022 Feb;88(1):64-72. (PMID: 35103317)
Gerodontology. 2012 Jun;29(2):e340-7. (PMID: 21453418)
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023 May;81(5):593-601. (PMID: 36716792)
J Dent. 2023 Dec;139:104748. (PMID: 37863173)
Indian J Psychol Med. 2013 Apr;35(2):121-6. (PMID: 24049221)
Int J Implant Dent. 2023 Oct 25;9(1):38. (PMID: 37875645)
J Dent Educ. 2016 Jan;80(1):83-90. (PMID: 26729688)
J Prosthodont. 2025 Mar 4;:. (PMID: 40038852)
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91. (PMID: 17695343)
BMC Oral Health. 2024 May 11;24(1):550. (PMID: 38734597)
J Dent. 2023 Jan;128:104384. (PMID: 36470471)
Dent Med Probl. 2020 Apr-Jun;57(2):191-196. (PMID: 32649808)
J Prosthodont Res. 2022 Jan 11;66(1):29-39. (PMID: 33504723)
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Sep;32(9):1097-1104. (PMID: 34218450)
Contributed Indexing:
Keywords: CBCT; Implant; Partially edentulous; Stability; Surgical guide
Substance Nomenclature:
0 (Dental Implants)
Entry Date(s):
Date Created: 20251211 Date Completed: 20260115 Latest Revision: 20260116
Update Code:
20260116
PubMed Central ID:
PMC12801966
DOI:
10.1186/s12903-025-07277-4
PMID:
41382089
Database:
MEDLINE

Weitere Informationen

Purpose: This study aimed to compare a retentive surgical guide design with a fixation pin design in unilateral mandibular distal extension cases and evaluate their resulting implant deviations.
Materials and Methods: Ten epoxy models with a soft tissue-simulating layer were used, each fitted with two surgical guide designs. The retentive guide featured clasp-like extensions, a 0.07 mm guide-to-tooth offset, and a 2.3 mm thickness. The fixation pin design had a 0.2 mm offset, a 3 mm thickness, and one fixation pin in the distal edentulous region. Eight directional forces were applied through the drill handle. The models were scanned before and after force application. Simulated implants were inserted into 180 scans, resulting in a total of 306 implants. Post-scan data were superimposed onto the initial plan to assess implant and guide deviation.
Results: The baseline deviation was 0.34 ± 0.19 mm for the retentive design and 0.30 ± 0.14 mm for the fixation pin design (P = 1.00). Both designs produced simulated implant deviations within the recommended 2 mm safety margin. However, the retentive design showed significantly greater vertical implant deviation compared to the fixation design (0.99 ± 0.76 mm vs. 0.50 ± 0.34 mm, P < 0.001).
Conclusion: Incorporating retention features into surgical guides reduces simulated implant displacement in unilateral distal extension cases. However, the retentive guide exhibited larger implant deviations than the fixation design and required additional software adjustments, indicating a need for further refinement.
(© 2025. The Author(s).)

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Ethical approval was granted by the local Ethics Committee of Alexandria University (IRB NO: 00010556-IORG0008839). Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.