AN INVITRO STUDY COMPARING TWO SOFTWARE PROGRAMS USED FOR IMPLANT PLANNING AND SURGICAL GUIDE FABRICATION

Abstract

Introduction: The accuracy of surgical guides is crucial for the success of implant-supported prostheses. Minor errors in data acquisition, software planning, or fabrication can lead to significant deviations, compromising implant placement. This study evaluates how two software programs—BlueSky Bio and 3Matic—affect the accuracy of surgical guide fabrication by comparing final implant positions to planned positions.Objectives: To determine which software enhances precision in implant placement by examining the impact of BlueSky Bio and 3Matic on surgical guide accuracy.Materials and Methods: In this in-vitro study, a patient with a bounded saddle edentulous area and a missing central tooth was selected, resulting in 20 surgical guides. The arch was recorded using condensation silicone, and an epoxy resin cast was created. STL files from the scanned model and DICOM files from a CBCT scan were imported into BlueSky Plan 4 and Mimics software. Surgical guides were designed to include adjacent teeth and proper seating windows, fabricated by the same operator using the same printer. Implant placement accuracy was assessed by measuring deviations between planned and actual positions.Results: In horizontal measurements at the hexagon, the BlueSky group had a mean deviation of 0.48mm (SD = 0.10mm), while the Mimics group averaged 0.73mm (SD = 0.14mm), significant at p = 0.001. For apex measurements, BlueSky averaged 0.67mm (SD = 0.19mm) compared to Mimics' 0.93mm (SD = 0.20mm), significant at p = 0.04.Conclusion: BlueSky's lower deviations suggest it may be the preferred clinical tool, while both programs produced clinically acceptable results.