The investigation determined that there were no device malfunctions.Production records indicate that registration between the stone model and patient scan was acceptable.The guide initially passed its quality analysis prior to shipment, confirming that the trajectories aligned with the dental model.The returned guide was determined to seat well on the dental model with stable sleeves.The trajectory analysis determined that the trajectory aligned well with the treatment plan and the deviation was within the standard tolerance of <0.5 mm.The treatment plan for this case was reviewed.The placement of the implants was done during a case planning session between the doctor and one of our surgical guide consultants via (b)(6).The consultant placed the implants based on the doctor's input, which the doctor was able to see and approve in real time.The treatment plan with the implant trajectories seen in the attached report was approved by the doctor prior to guide fabrication.As the trajectories were confirmed to align with the treatment plan, the reported observations during surgery by the doctor may have conflicted with her initial perception during case planning.
|
The doctor successfully seated the guide in the patient's mouth and began surgery with the 2.2 mm drill for all sites.The doctor attempted to use the 2.8 mm drill but stopped after she observed that the trajectories looked off for all sites.She claimed that site 4 appeared to be too buccal, site 6 was too angled, and that sites 4 and 5 looked closer than planned.No implants were placed and all sites were grafted.
|