Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download
ePaper created 2017-10-13, 10:01:15 | version 1.38.0
A c c u r a c y o f c o m p u t e r - a s s i s t e d i m p l a n t p l a c e m e n t Fig. 8 Schematic diagram of the superimposition of virtual planning (gray) and the STL file derived from the intraoral impression (red). Fig. 9 Three-dimensional superimposition of planned and placed implants. Fig. 10 Maximum angular deviation calculated according to the implant diameter and length. Fig. 8 Fig. 9 Fig. 10 Results Preliminary data from the 12 patients were included in the present study. Patients were randomized to the fully digital group (6 patients with 17 implants) and control group (6 patients with 20 implants). All of the implants were inserted according to the manufacturer’s instructions, with an insertion torque ranging between 35 and 45 N cm. Overall, the analysis of the final accuracy found a total mean error of 2.34 ± 1.44° (range: 0.3–5.8°) in angle, 0.49 ± 0.29 mm (range: 0.1–1.1 mm) in the hor- izontal plane (mesiodistal) and 0.53 ± 0.42 mm 14 Volume 3 | Issue 3/2017 Journal of Oral Science & Rehabilitation