Evaluation of the Accuracy of Dental Implant Placement on Different Cast Models

Abstract

Introduction: To compare the accuracy of implant placement on mandibular models fabricated from different materials using a single digitally designed surgical guide, and to identify which model provided the highest precision and cost-effectiveness for research and training applications.

Materials and Methods: Nine identical mandibular models were fabricated with missing teeth at the right lateral incisor, right first molar, and left first premolar. Three cast models were used: porous polyethylene (MedPor), photopolymer resin (SprintRay), and photopolymer resin (MAZIC® D MODEL). A single CAD/CAM surgical guide was designed in REALGuide 5.3 and printed with SprintRay technology. Using standardized protocols, 27 demo implants (three per model) were placed. Postoperative CBCT scans were digitally superimposed with planned positions to assess angular and linear deviations (coronal, apical, mesial, distal, and labial). The data were analyzed via descriptive statistics, one-way ANOVA, and Tukey’s HSD tests.

Results: Analysis revealed a statistically significant deviation at the lateral apical position (ANOVA, p = 0.0011). Porous polyethylene (MedPor) demonstrated greater error than did photopolymer resin (SprintRay) (p = 0.0107) or photopolymer resin (MAZIC® D MODEL) (p = 0.0009), whereas no significant difference was detected between the two resin-based models (p = 0.0775). Although the photopolymer resin (SprintRay) resulted in greater mean deviations at premolar sites, these differences were not statistically significant. Intragroup analysis indicated site-dependent variation within photopolymer resin (MAZIC® D MODEL) (p = 0.0313), whereas porous polyethylene (MedPor) and photopolymer resin (SprintRay) exhibited more consistent error distributions across sites.

Conclusion: Photopolymer resin models presented the highest apical accuracy at lateral incisor sites, outperforming porous polyethylene. Resin-based models (SprintRay and MAZIC® D MODEL) proved accurate and cost-effective, whereas porous polyethylene produced larger deviations despite being more than ten times more costly. The two photopolymers also differ in their mechanical properties.