Guillermo Pradíes Ramiro

Prof. Dr. Guillermo Pradíes Ramiro

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

25Years (2002-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 July 2014 in The International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
BGBeatriz Giménez
Beatriz Giménez
Mutlu ÖzcanMutlu Özcan
Mutlu Özcan
FMFrancisco Martínez-Rus
Francisco Martínez-Rus
GRGuillermo Pradíes Ramiro
Guillermo Pradíes Ramiro
Beatriz Gim?nez, DDS/Mutlu ?zcan, DDS, Dr Med Dent, PhD/Francisco Mart?nez-Rus, DDS, PhD/Guillermo Prad?es, DDS, PhD: Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy of a digital impression system based on parallel confocal red laser technology, taking into consideration clinical parameters such as operator experience and angulation and depth of implants. Materials and Methods: A maxillary master model with six implants (located bilaterally in the second molar, second premolar, and lateral incisor positions) was fitted with six polyether ether ketone scan bodies. One second premolar implant was placed with 30 degrees of mesial angulation; the opposite implant was positioned with 30 degrees of distal angulation. The lateral incisor implants were placed 2 or 4 mm subgingivally. Two experienced and two inexperienced operators performed intraoral scanning. Five different interimplant distances were then measured. The files obtained from the scans were imported with reverse-engineering software. Measurements were then made with a coordinate measurement machine, with values from the master model used as reference values. The deviations from the actual values were then calculated. The differences between experienced and inexperienced operators and the effects of different implant angulations and depths were compared statistically. Results: Overall, operator 3 obtained significantly less accurate results. The angulated implants did not significantly influence accuracy compared to the parallel implants. Differences were found in the amount of error in the different quadrants. The second scanned quadrant had significantly worse results than the first scanned quadrant. Impressions of the implants placed at the tissue level were less accurate than implants placed 2 and 4 mm subgingivally. Conclusions: The operator affected the accuracy of measurements, but the performance of the operator was not necessarily dependent on experience. Angulated implants did not decrease the accuracy of the digital impression system tested. The scanned distance affected the predictability of the accuracy of the scanner, and the error increased with the increased length of the scanned section.


24 July 2013 in Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
BGBeatriz Giménez
Beatriz Giménez
Mutlu ÖzcanMutlu Özcan
Mutlu Özcan
FMFrancisco Martínez-Rus
Francisco Martínez-Rus
GRGuillermo Pradíes Ramiro
Guillermo Pradíes Ramiro

1 February 2015 in Journal of Dentistry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GRGuillermo Pradíes Ramiro
Guillermo Pradíes Ramiro
CZCristina Zarauz
Cristina Zarauz
AVArelhys Valverde
Arelhys Valverde
AFAlberto Ferreiroa
Alberto Ferreiroa
FMFrancisco Martínez-Rus
Francisco Martínez-Rus

23 January 2016 in Clinical Oral Investigations
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SBS. Berrendero
S. Berrendero
MSM. P. Salido
M. P. Salido
AVA. Valverde
A. Valverde
AFA. Ferreiroa
A. Ferreiroa
GRGuillermo Pradíes Ramiro
Guillermo Pradíes Ramiro

12 September 2015 in Clinical Oral Investigations
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CZCristina Zarauz
Cristina Zarauz
AVArelhys Valverde
Arelhys Valverde
FMFrancisco Martínez-Rus
Francisco Martínez-Rus
BHBassam Hassan
Bassam Hassan
GRGuillermo Pradíes Ramiro
Guillermo Pradíes Ramiro