Accuracy of freehand surgery, static and dynamic computer assisted surgery on zygomatic implant placement: A systematic review and meta-analyses

被引:1
|
作者
Traboulsi-Garet, Bassel [1 ]
Jorba-Garcia, Adria [1 ,4 ]
Bara-Casaus, Javier [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Camps-Font, Octavi [1 ,4 ]
Valmaseda-Castellon, Eduard [1 ,4 ]
Figueiredo, Rui [1 ,4 ]
Sanchez-Garces, Angels [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Barcelona, Sch Med & Hlth Sci, Barcelona, Spain
[2] Hosp Univ Sagrat Cor, Grp Quironsalud, Dent & Maxillofacial Inst, Barcelona, Spain
[3] Univ Barcelona, Hosp Univ Mutua Terrassa, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, Terrassa, Spain
[4] IDIBELL Inst, Barcelona, Spain
关键词
Accuracy; Zygomatic implants; Arch; /; Zygomatic; Image guided surgery; Static guided surgery; TIME SURGICAL NAVIGATION; DENTAL IMPLANTS; GUIDED SURGERY; PATIENT; REHABILITATION; COMPLICATIONS; SURVIVAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.jcms.2024.12.002
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Real-time surgical navigation systems (dynamic computer-aided surgery, d-CAIS) and static guided surgery (static computer-aided surgery, s-CAIS) have been shown to enhance the accuracy of zygomatic implant (ZI) placement. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare the accuracy and risk of complications associated with d-CAIS and s-CAIS in ZI placement. A systematic review of published studies involving more than 4 patients was conducted to assess and compare the accuracy of d-CAIS and s-CAIS in zygomatic implant placement. Only one study included freehand ZI placement as a control. The primary outcomes measured were the accuracy of implant placement relative to preoperative planning, with a secondary focus on evaluating any potential complications. Out of 903 screened studies, 14 met the inclusion criteria. Freehand zygomatic implant placement was used as a control in only 1 study. The results revealed a mean apex deviation of 2.07 mm (95% CI: 2.01 to 2.13; I2 = 83.14%) for d-CAIS, 1.29 mm (95% CI: 1.15 to 1.43; I2 = 94.5%) for s-CAIS, and 4.98 mm (95% CI: 3.59 to 6.37; I2 = not assessable) for freehand placement. Reported complications included mucositis, reversible bilateral sinusitis, oroantral fistula, unspecified reversible postoperative complications, and fracture of the anterior wall of the zygoma. Both CAIS systems demonstrated high accuracy and safety in ZI placement, with a nearly 99% success rate at 6 months of follow-up. These findings suggest that both d-CAIS and s-CAIS are reliable methods for improving the precision and reducing the risks associated with ZI procedures.
引用
收藏
页码:301 / 311
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Accuracy of implant placement with a combined use of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in single tooth space: A randomized controlled trial
    Yotpibulwong, Thanida
    Arunjaroensuk, Sirida
    Kaboosaya, Boosana
    Sinpitaksakul, Phonkit
    Arksornnukit, Mansuang
    Mattheos, Nikos
    Pimkhaokham, Atiphan
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2023, 34 (04) : 330 - 341
  • [22] Accuracy of robotic computer-assisted implant surgery in clinical studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Luo, Zixin
    Li, An
    Unkovskiy, Alexey
    Li, Jiang
    Beuer, Florian
    Wu, Zhe
    Li, Ping
    BMC ORAL HEALTH, 2025, 25 (01):
  • [23] Accuracy of computer-aided static and dynamic navigation systems in the placement of zygomatic dental implants
    Gonzalez Rueda, Juan Ramon
    Galparsoro Catalan, Agustin
    de Paz Hermoso, Victor Manuel
    Riad Deglow, Elena
    Zubizarreta-Macho, Alvaro
    Pato Mourelo, Jesus
    Montero Martin, Javier
    Hernandez Montero, Sofia
    BMC ORAL HEALTH, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [24] Accuracy of keyless vs drill-key implant systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery using two guide-hole designs compared to freehand implant placement: an in vitro study
    Raabe, Clemens
    Schuetz, Tabea S.
    Chappuis, Vivianne
    Yilmaz, Burak
    Abou-Ayash, Samir
    Couso-Queiruga, Emilio
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2023, 9 (01) : 4
  • [25] Accuracy of keyless vs drill-key implant systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery using two guide-hole designs compared to freehand implant placement: an in vitro study
    Clemens Raabe
    Tabea S. Schuetz
    Vivianne Chappuis
    Burak Yilmaz
    Samir Abou-Ayash
    Emilio Couso-Queiruga
    International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 9
  • [26] Accuracy assessment of dynamic computer–aided implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Adrià Jorba-García
    Albert González-Barnadas
    Octavi Camps-Font
    Rui Figueiredo
    Eduard Valmaseda-Castellón
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2021, 25 : 2479 - 2494
  • [27] Influence of implant macrodesign and insertion connection technology on the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgery
    El Kholy, Karim
    Ebenezer, Supriya
    Wittneben, Julia-Gabriela
    Lazarin, Rafael
    Rousson, Dominique
    Buser, Daniel
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2019, 21 (05) : 1073 - 1079
  • [28] The Accuracy of Dental Implant Placement With Different Methods of Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Network Meta-Analysis of Clinical Studies
    Mahardawi, Basel
    Jiaranuchart, Sirimanas
    Arunjaroensuk, Sirida
    Dhanesuan, Kanit
    Mattheos, Nikos
    Pimkhaokham, Atiphan
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2025, 36 (01) : 1 - 16
  • [29] CLINICAL FACTORS AFFECTING THE ACCURACY OF GUIDED IMPLANT SURGERY-A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
    Zhou, Wenjuan
    Liu, Zhonghao
    Song, Liansheng
    Kuo, Chia-Ling
    Shafer, David M.
    JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED DENTAL PRACTICE, 2018, 18 (01) : 28 - 40
  • [30] The Impact of Surgical Guide Fixation and Implant Location on Accuracy of Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery
    Pessoa, Roberto
    Siqueira, Rafael
    Li, Junying
    Saleh, Islam
    Meneghetti, Priscila
    Bezerra, Fabio
    Wang, Hom-Lay
    Mendonca, Gustavo
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2022, 31 (02): : 155 - 164