Based on our investigation, we can conclude that all production processes were properly followed, and the trajectories of the guide align with the doctor's final plan.The deviations may have been caused by an inaccurate registration at the implant sites, which was difficult to detect due to a lack of soft tissue separation throughout the patient scan.The subsequent soft tissue perforation at site #19, and the drill missing bone at the site entirely, may have been caused by the drill slipping after hitting the angled portion of the patient's arch and veering buccally.
|
The guide was used for implant surgery.The doctor stated that after performing surgery with the guide, the implants were more buccal than planned.Site #19 missed the bone and perforated the buccal soft tissue, resulting in the doctor adding membrane and grafting the area.Site #20 was acceptable, but more buccal than planned.
|