Does the macro design of an implant affect the accuracy of template-guided implantation? A prospective clinical study

International Journal of Implant Dentistry

Table 2 Deviations between the planned and actually achieved implant positions

	Test group N = 20			Comparison group N = 48			Group comparison p value
	Mean (SD)	95% CI	Min–max	Mean (SD)	95% CI	Min–max
Deviation at implant shoulder (mm)
3D	0.94 (0.53)	0.69–1.19	0.15–2.15	0.66 (0.30)	0.58–0.75	0.18–1.66	0.024^a
Mesiodistal	0.27 (0.25)	0.15–0.39	0.04–1.00
Buccolingual	0.42 (0.33)	0.26–0.57	0.01–1.11
Apicocoronal	0.68 (0.55)	0.43–0.95	0.01–1.92	0.28 (0.27)	0.20–0.36)	0.00–1.40	0.002^a
Deviation at implant apex (mm)
3D	1.36 (0.62)	1.05–1.64	0.31–2.92	1.36 (0.65)	1.17–1.55	0.26–3.50	0.682
Mesiodistal	0.67 (0.53)	0.43–0.92	0.07–2.00
Buccolingual	0.74 (0.56)	0.47–1.00	0.06–1.87
Apicocoronal	0.67 (0.51)	0.43–0.91	0.10–2.06
Angular deviation (degree)	4.1 (2.3)	3.0–5.2	0.4–10.0	4.0 (2.1)	3.4–4.6	0.4–11.1	0.916

Group comparison between the test and comparison group using the Mann-Whitney U test with a p value < 0.05 (bold with ^a)