Background
angulation
Backwards planning in oral implantology enables the clinician to conceive the number, position, and angulation of dental implants based on the prosthetic plan [Guided implant placement allows the surgeon to perform an intervention with decreased invasiveness compared to the free-hand method, which reduces postoperative morbidity [According to the results of the meta-analysis of Gargallo-Albiol et al. based on ten randomized clinical studies, a 0.51 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.29, 0.73]) coronal global deviation, 0.75 mm (95% CI [-1.19, -0.31]) apical global deviation, and 3.63° (95% CI [-4.10, -3.16]) benefit in accuracy is observed in the literature, favouring fully guided surgery over half-guided surgery [There is a lack of evidence in the literature on whether using step drills or straight drills for the finalization of the implant bed during pilot-guided sCAIS influences the accuracy of dental implant placement.This in vitro study aimed to compare the accuracy of implant placement in model surgeries according to the design of the drills (straight drills or step drills) used to finalize the implant bed during pilot-guided sCAIS. Our null hypothesis was that there is no significant difference in the accuracy of implant placement achieved whether straight drills or step drills are used to finalize implant beds following the guided pilot osteotomy. In addition, we hypothesized that fully guided sCAIS allows for more accurate implant positioning compared to the pilot-guided intervention regardless of the design of the drills used to finalize implant osteotomies.