الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 87 |  |  |
| | | from | 87 | | |
Abstract
Dental implants have become the treatment of the choice for many cases and widely used for the replacement of missed teeth. The development of dental implants helps the patients to get better prognosis and the implant supported oral restoration has become used widely in treatment options for partially edentulous and completely edentulous patients.
The success of dental implant treatment depends much on the three-dimensional (3D) position of implant in the bone and its location to the adjacent teeth, vital structures, and the occlusion. A malposition or misaligned implant often makes problems at the time of surgery or during fabrication of the prostheses.
One of the most challenging aspects of dental implant placement is to predict the positioning of the implant in the bone. The surgical guide template is a very vital tool during implant treatment to achieve the planned position.
Guided implant surgery was introduced into clinical practice years ago to aid in accuracy, safe, and precise implant placement and decrease human error. It allows the transfer of the digitally planned rehabilitation project directly to the surgical field by using a surgical guide.
This study is aiming to study the accuracy of implant surgical Guide: Radiology cast scan vs. 3D optical scanner scan
Seven patients were selected (4 male, 3 female) from outpatient clinics of dental hospital faculty of dentistry, Minia University who partial edentulous patient with at least 6 teeth age, above 18 years, in need of an implant-supported fixed restoration and Patient seeking at least two implants. Exclusion criteria: Age below 18, Edentulous patient, Patient need bone graft before implant. patient with uncontrolled systemic disease, Severe bruxism or clenching and Patients who received radiation therapy, chemotherapy, or both.
Intergroup comparison between CBCT cast scan and optical cast scan there was no statistically significant difference.
Angular deviation was 2.15 ± 0.37 degree in optical cast scan while in CBCT cast scan it was 2.38 ± 0.37 degree, although optical scan was less than CBCT cast scan in angular deviation, there was no statistically significant difference. Coronal deviation of Implant was 0.49 ± 0.12 mm in optical scan while in CBCT scan it was 0.49 ± 0.12 mm, although optical scan was less than CBCT cast scan in coronal deviation of implant, there was no statistically significant difference between both scans
According to our findings, CBCT cast scan is slightly less accurate than optical scanner cast scan but is considered to lie within a clinically acceptable margin of error and should therefore not affect the clinical applications of this digitalization process.
Stereolithography SLA surgical guide was used in this study are suitable for clinical application. The Stereolithography system is relatively accurate with low cost.
The study result showed that CBCT cast scan is a valid and accurate method for cast digitalization.
CBCT cast scan is less costly and accurate technique for surgical guide fabrication.