Home > Journals > Minerva Dental and Oral Science > Past Issues > Articles online first > Minerva Dental and Oral Science 2021 Apr 30



To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian


Publication history
Cite this article as



Minerva Dental and Oral Science 2021 Apr 30

DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04469-1


language: English

Comparison between CBCT superimposition protocol and S.T.A.P. method to evaluate the accuracy in implant insertion in guided surgery

Fabrizio CARINI 1, Giulia COPPOLA 2 , Vito SAGGESE 3

1 Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; 2 University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy; 3 Freelance, Pisa, Italy


BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of implant placement using static guided surgery. Two methods of measuring accuracy were compared, the superimposition of CBCT and the non-radiological S.T.A.P. method.
METHODS: In this prospective clinical study 23 implants were placed with static surgical template using a flapless technique and post-extractive procedure. Six months after surgery, a post-operative CBCT was performed to assess the position of the implants and at the same time dental impressions were taken for the final prosthesis. The plaster models made at this stage have made it possible to obtain the position of the implants inserted using the probe technology. Pre-operative and post-operative data were superimposed, deviations in the three dimensions of the space were calculated. The differences between the two measurement methods were assessed.
RESULTS: The study showed no statistically significant differences between the two methods of measuring accuracy at the implant platform level, apex or angles. The average real deviation detected at the implant platform level is 1.16±0.58 mm with CBCT, 1.22±0.55 mm with the S.T.A.P. method; at the apex level is 1.48±0.98 mm with CBCT, 1.47±0.72 mm with the S.T.A.P. method. The average difference between CBCT and S.T.A.P. method for real deviation is 0.06±0.75 mm at the platform level and 0.007±1.24 mm at the apex level.
CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that measuring accuracy by S.T.A.P. method is comparable to that obtained by CBCT superimposition.

KEY WORDS: Accuracy; Guided surgery; Implant; Planning

top of page