APA
Riad Deglow, Elena & Lazo Torres, Nayra Zurima & Gutiérrez Muñoz, David & Bufalá Pérez, María & Galparsoro Catalán, Agustín & Zubizarreta Macho, Álvaro & Abella Sans, Francesc & Hernández Montero, Sofía .Influence of Static Navigation Technique on the Accuracy of Autotransplanted Teeth in Surgically Created Sockets.
ISO 690
Riad Deglow, Elena & Lazo Torres, Nayra Zurima & Gutiérrez Muñoz, David & Bufalá Pérez, María & Galparsoro Catalán, Agustín & Zubizarreta Macho, Álvaro & Abella Sans, Francesc & Hernández Montero, Sofía. Influence of Static Navigation Technique on the Accuracy of Autotransplanted Teeth in Surgically Created Sockets.
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12080/29439
Resumen:
The aim of this study was to analyse and compare the position of single¿rooted
autotransplanted teeth using computer¿aided SNT drilling and conventional freehand (FT) drilling,
by comparing the planned and performed position at the coronal, apical and angularlevel. Materials
and methods: Forty single¿root upper teeth were selected and distributed into the following study
groups: A. Autotransplanted tooth using the computer¿aided static navigation technique (SNT) (n
= 20) and B. Autotransplanted tooth using the conventional free¿hand technique (FT) (n = 20).
Afterwards, the teeth were embedded into two experimental models and 10 single¿root upper teeth
were randomly autotransplanted in each experimental model. The experimental models were
submitted to a preoperative cone¿beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan and a digital
impression by a 3D intraoral scan, in addition to a postoperative CBCT scan, after the
autotransplantation. Datasets from postoperative CBCT scans of the two study groups were
uploaded to the 3D implant planning software, aligned with the autotransplantation planning, and
the coronal, apical and angular deviations were measured. The results were analysed using
Student¿s t¿test and Mann¿Whitney non¿parametric statistical analysis. Results: Coronal (p = 0.079)
and angular (p = 0.208) statistical comparisons did not present statistically significant differences;
however, statistically significant differences between the apical deviation of the SNT and FT study
groups (p = 0.038) were also observed. Conclusions: The computer¿aided static navigation technique
does not provide higher accuracy in the positioning of single¿root autotransplanted teeth compared
to the conventional free¿hand technique.
Keywords: accuracy; computed¿assisted template; computer¿aided static navigation; cone¿beam
computed tomography scan; digital impression; tooth autotransplantation