초록/요약

Purpose: This study aims to compare and evaluate the accuracy of surgical templates fabricated using coordinate synchronization processing with five-axis milling and design-related processing with rapid prototyping (RP). Materials and Methods: Master phantoms with 10 embedded gutta-percha cylinders hidden under artificial gingiva were fabricated and imaged using cone beam computed tomography. Vectors of the hidden cylinders were extracted and transferred to those of the planned implants through reverse engineering using virtual planning software. An RP-produced template was fabricated by stereolithography in photopolymer at the RP center according to planned data. Metal sleeves were bonded after holes were bored (group RP). For the milled template, milling coordinates were synchronized using the conversion process for the coordinate synchronization platform located on the model's bottom. Metal bushings were set on holes milled on the five-axis milling machine, on which the model was fixed through the coordinate synchronization plate, and the framework was constructed on the model using orthodontic resin (group CS). A computed tomography image was taken with templates firmly fixed on models using anchor pins (RP) or anchor screws (CS). The accuracy was analyzed via reverse engineering. Differences between the two groups were compared by repeated measures two-factor analysis. Results: From the reverse-engineered image of the template on the experimental model, RP-produced templates showed significantly larger deviations than did milled surgical guides. Maximum deviations of the group RP were 1.58 mm (horizontal), 1.68 mm (vertical), and 8.51 degrees (angular); those of the group CS were 0.68 mm (horizontal), 0.41 mm (vertical), and 3.23 degrees (angular). Conclusions: A comparison of milling and RP template production methods showed that a vector-milled surgical guide had significantly smaller deviations than did an RP-produced template. The accuracy of computer-guided milled surgical templates was within the safety margin of previous studies.