Accuracy of Full-Guided and Half-Guided Surgical Templates in Anterior Immediate and Delayed Implantation: A Retrospective Study

Computer-aided implantology has developed rapidly in recent years, this study aimed to compare the accuracy of guided-surgery between anterior immediate and delayed implantation, and simultaneously assess the effect of full-guided and half-guided templates on accuracy values. Seventy-six implants were inserted in 63 patients using full-guided or half-guided template in the anterior zone. Postoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was matched with preoperative planning to evaluate the deviation between actual and planned implants. No statistical difference was found in any deviation between immediate and delayed implantation (p > 0.05). In anterior immediate implantation, the global coronal, apical, depth and angular deviations of full-guided templates were all significantly lower than those of half-guided templates (0.66 ± 0.26 vs. 1.10 ± 0.76 mm, 0.96 ± 0.41 vs. 1.43 ± 0.70 mm, 0.46 ± 0.24 mm vs. 0.93 ± 0.79 mm and 1.69° ± 0.94° vs. 2.57° ± 1.57°). While in delayed implantation, full-guided templates only perform better with statistical significance on global apical and depth deviation (1.01 ± 0.42 vs. 1.51 ± 0.55 mm and 0.32 ± 0.26 vs. 0.71 ± 0.47 mm). After excluding the influence of depth deviation, the coronal and apical deviations between the two systems in immediate implantation and the apical deviations in delayed implantation had no statistical difference. Within the limit of this study, the results suggested the accuracy of guided-surgeries for anterior immediate and delayed implantations was comparable, and full-guided template was more accurate for immediate and delayed implantation.