Assessment of the Accuracy of Surgical Guide Designed From Dental Model Optical Scan Versus Impression Inversion With Markers Techniques in Computer Guided Implantology. Randomized Clinical Trial.

Status

UNKNOWN

Phases

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT03367949

Enrollment

Registered

2017-12-11

Start date

2017-07-01

Completion date

2018-04-01

Last updated

2017-12-12

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Accuracy of Surgical Guide in Computer Guided Implantology

Keywords

Surgical guide, impression inversion, stereolithographic surgical guides

Brief summary

Dental model cast accuracy can be affected by many variables as tray material, impression material and time elapsed before pouring the impression. All these factors would affect the accuracy of the surgical guide Impression inversion with markers technique avoids the dimension changes that may happen from pouring of the dental model cast. Also it saves time as no need for optical scan of the model cast and for scan appliance even in cases of multiple restoration. Adding markers to impression tray ensures an accurate merge even if the patient has restored dentition that may cause scatter during the CT/CBCT scan. This study will is for Assessment of the Accuracy of Surgical Guide designed from Dental Model Optical Scan versus Impression Inversion with Markers techniques in Computer Guided Implantology.

Interventions

OTHERSurgical guide designed from Impression inversion with markers

Rather than using optical scan of the cast , We will use impression inversion technique with VPS impression and adding CBCT Markers on the tray

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

OTHER

Masking

QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

Each patient will be given a code by the researcher (A.A) and the observers will be blind to which group this case belong. Patients, evaluators and data analyst will be blinded

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Healthy volunteers

Yes

Inclusion criteria

1. Partially Edentulous patients seeking for dental implants 2. Patients with Bucco-lingual bone thickness more than 6 mm allowing flapless implant placement. 3. Medically free patients. \-

Exclusion criteria

1- Patients with thin ridges. 2- Patients with systemic disease that may affect bone quality. 3- Patients with poor oral hygiene and active periodontal diseases. 4- Anatomical situations requiring regenerative procedure. 5- Completely edentulous patient 6-Patient with limited mouth opening \-

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Evaluation of angular deviation of virtual implants and actual implant position according to scanning protocol optical scan of the model Versus impression inversion using CBCT.	Immediate post operative

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Evaluation of linear deviation of virtual implants and actual implant position according to scanning protocol optical scan of the model Versus impression inversion using CBCT	Immediate post operative

Countries

Egypt

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026