Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of 3-dimensional (3D)-printed surgical guides for fully guided immediate implants from different manufacturers.
METHODS: Eighteen 3D printed fully guided surgical guides (split into 3 groups [n = 6] according to their manufacturer: Company, Desktop, or Lab), were used to place 72 implants (n = 24) in identical maxillary models. After placement, the mean global, angular, mesiodistal, buccopalatal, and vertical deviation at the platform and apex of the placed implants, relative to their preoperatively planned positions, was calculated.
RESULTS: Significant differences in global apex deviation, angular deviation, mesiodistal apex deviation, and vertical platform and apex deviation were found between the Lab and Desktop groups (p ≤ 0.007). Significant differences in mesiodistal platform and apex deviation and buccopalatal apex deviation were also found between the Company and Desktop groups (p ≤ 0.005). Finally, significant differences in buccopalatal apex deviation, and vertical platform and apex deviation were found between the Company and Lab groups (p ≤ 0.003). Mean differences between guide groups across all parameters never exceeded 0.5 mm or 1°.
CONCLUSIONS: The choice of 3D printer has a significant effect on the accuracy of fully guided immediate implants. However, the clinical relevance of these differences may be considered limited.
METHODS: Eighteen 3D printed fully guided surgical guides (split into 3 groups [n = 6] according to their manufacturer: Company, Desktop, or Lab), were used to place 72 implants (n = 24) in identical maxillary models. After placement, the mean global, angular, mesiodistal, buccopalatal, and vertical deviation at the platform and apex of the placed implants, relative to their preoperatively planned positions, was calculated.
RESULTS: Significant differences in global apex deviation, angular deviation, mesiodistal apex deviation, and vertical platform and apex deviation were found between the Lab and Desktop groups (p ≤ 0.007). Significant differences in mesiodistal platform and apex deviation and buccopalatal apex deviation were also found between the Company and Desktop groups (p ≤ 0.005). Finally, significant differences in buccopalatal apex deviation, and vertical platform and apex deviation were found between the Company and Lab groups (p ≤ 0.003). Mean differences between guide groups across all parameters never exceeded 0.5 mm or 1°.
CONCLUSIONS: The choice of 3D printer has a significant effect on the accuracy of fully guided immediate implants. However, the clinical relevance of these differences may be considered limited.
摘要：
目的：这项研究的目的是评估三维（3D）打印的手术指南的准确性，用于不同制造商的完全引导的即时植入物。
方法：18个3D打印完全引导的手术指南（根据其制造商分为3组[n=6]：公司，台式机,或实验室)，用于在相同的上颌模型中放置72个植入物（n=24）。放置后，平均全球，角度,中端,颊部,以及放置植入物的平台和顶点处的垂直偏差，相对于他们术前计划的位置，已计算。
结果：全球顶点偏差的显着差异，角度偏差,中远端顶点偏离，在实验室组和桌面组之间发现了垂直平台和顶点偏差(p≤0.007)。Company组和Desktop组之间的中端平台和顶点偏离和颊板顶点偏离也存在显着差异（p≤0.005）。最后,颊部顶点偏差的显著差异，公司和实验室组之间发现了垂直平台和顶点偏差(p≤0.003)。在所有参数中,引导组之间的平均差异从未超过0.5mm或1°。
结论：3D打印机的选择对完全引导的即时植入物的准确性具有显着影响。然而,这些差异的临床相关性可能被认为是有限的.
方法：18个3D打印完全引导的手术指南（根据其制造商分为3组[n=6]：公司，台式机,或实验室)，用于在相同的上颌模型中放置72个植入物（n=24）。放置后，平均全球，角度,中端,颊部,以及放置植入物的平台和顶点处的垂直偏差，相对于他们术前计划的位置，已计算。
结果：全球顶点偏差的显着差异，角度偏差,中远端顶点偏离，在实验室组和桌面组之间发现了垂直平台和顶点偏差(p≤0.007)。Company组和Desktop组之间的中端平台和顶点偏离和颊板顶点偏离也存在显着差异（p≤0.005）。最后,颊部顶点偏差的显著差异，公司和实验室组之间发现了垂直平台和顶点偏差(p≤0.003)。在所有参数中,引导组之间的平均差异从未超过0.5mm或1°。
结论：3D打印机的选择对完全引导的即时植入物的准确性具有显着影响。然而,这些差异的临床相关性可能被认为是有限的.
