STUDY OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different guide-support modalities on the linear and angular accuracy of implant placement. In this retrospective clinical investigation conducted at a single specialty hospital, a total of 180 implants were analyzed, divided into three equal groups (n = 60) based on the guide support type: tooth-supported, bone-supported, and mucosa-supported. Accuracy was assessed by superimposing preoperative virtual plans with postoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans, measuring linear deviations at the neck and apex of the implant, as well as angular discrepancies.

RESULTS

• The type of guide support was found to be a significant factor associated with surgical accuracy (p < 0.001).
• Tooth-supported guides demonstrated the highest level of accuracy, with a mean angular deviation of 1.81° ± 0.45° and linear deviations at the neck and apex of 0.59 ± 0.18 mm and 0.73 ± 0.19 mm, respectively.
• These were followed by bone-supported guides (2.14° ± 0.48°; 1.04 ± 0.26 mm; 1.61 ± 0.31 mm), while mucosa-supported guides exhibited the greatest deviations (2.95° ± 0.60°; 1.47 ± 0.29 mm; 1.87 ± 0.37 mm).
• Significant intergroup differences and large effect sizes were observed, particularly regarding angular and horizontal discrepancies. 

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrate a distinct gradient of accuracy based on guide support, establishing tooth-supported guides as the most accurate, followed by bone-supported and, lastly, mucosa-supported guides. While all modalities are clinically applicable, the use of mucosa-supported guides necessitates increased safety margins to account for the increased risk of linear and angular discrepancies inherent to mucosal tissue displacement.

Adapted from I Smojver et al., J Funct Biomater. 2026 Apr 17;17(4):194, for more info about this publication, click HERE

This review is part of the Straumann "Scientific Highlights Newsletter 3/26".