Accuracy of dental implant placement with or without the use of a dynamic navigation assisted system: A randomized clinical trial

被引:21
|
作者
Jorba-Garcia, Adria [1 ]
Bara-Casaus, Jose Javier [2 ]
Camps-Font, Octavi [3 ,4 ]
Sanchez-Garces, Maria angeles [3 ,4 ]
Figueiredo, Rui [3 ,4 ]
Valmaseda-Castellon, Eduard [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Barcelona, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Master Oral Surg & Implantol, Barcelona, Spain
[2] Univ Hosp Sagrat Cor, Dent & Maxillofacial Inst, Barcelona, Spain
[3] Univ Barcelona, Fac Med & Hlth Sci, Oral Surg, Barcelona, Spain
[4] IDIBELL Inst, Bellvitge Biomed Res Inst, Barcelona, Spain
关键词
computer-assisted; dental implants; dental prosthesis; implant-supported; surgery; surgical navigation systems; COMPUTER-TECHNOLOGY APPLICATIONS; DENTISTRY; SURGERY; TOMOGRAPHY; AESTHETICS;
D O I
10.1111/clr.14050
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
ObjectivesTo assess dental implant placement accuracy with a dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (dCAIS) system and a freehand approach. Secondarily, to compare the patients' perception and quality of life (QoL) with the two approaches. MethodsA double-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted. Consecutive partially edentulous patients were randomly allocated to the dCAIS or standard freehand approach groups. Implant placement accuracy was evaluated by overlapping the preoperative and postoperative Cone Beam Computer Tomographs (CBCT) and recording linear deviations at the implant apex and platform (in mm) and angular deviations (in degrees). Questionnaires recorded self-reported satisfaction, pain and QoL during surgery and postoperatively. ResultsThirty patients (22 implants) were enrolled in each group. One patient was lost to follow-up. A significant difference (p < .001) in mean angular deviation was found between the dCAIS (4.02 degrees; 95% CI: 2.85 to 5.19) and the FH (7.97 degrees; 95% CI: 5.36 to 10.58) groups. Linear deviations were significantly lower in the dCAIS group, except for the apex vertical deviation, where no differences were found. Although dCAIS took 14 min longer (95% CI: 6.43 to 21.24; p < .001), patients in both groups considered the surgical time acceptable. Postoperative pain and analgesic consumption during the first postoperative week were similar between groups and self-reported satisfaction was very high. ConclusiondCAIS systems significantly increase the accuracy of implant placement in partially edentulous patients in comparison with the conventional freehand approach. However, they increase the surgical time significantly and do not seem to improve patient satisfaction or reduce postoperative pain.
引用
收藏
页码:438 / 449
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Conventional and Computer-Assisted Implant Planning and Placement in Partially Edentulous Patients. Part 4: Accuracy of Implant Placement
    Schneider, David
    Sancho-Puchades, Manuel
    Mir-Mari, Javier
    Muehlemann, Sven
    Jung, Ronald
    Haemmerle, Christoph
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERIODONTICS & RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2019, 39 (04) : E111 - E122
  • [42] Accuracy of Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation Compared to Computer-Aided Static Navigation for Dental Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study
    Mediavilla Guzman, Alfonso
    Riad Deglow, Elena
    Zubizarreta-Macho, Alvaro
    Agustin-Panadero, Ruben
    Hernandez Montero, Sofia
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2019, 8 (12)
  • [43] Three-dimensional accuracy of implant placement in a computer-assisted navigation system
    Chiu, Wai-kuen
    Luk, Wai-kuen
    Cheung, Lim-kwong
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2006, 21 (03) : 465 - 470
  • [44] Comparison of the accuracy of implant position for two-implants supported fixed dental prosthesis using static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: A randomized controlled clinical trial
    Yimarj, Paweena
    Subbalekha, Keskanya
    Dhanesuan, Kanit
    Siriwatana, Kiti
    Mattheos, Nikos
    Pimkhaokham, Atiphan
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2020, 22 (06) : 672 - 678
  • [45] Accuracy and efficiency of a calibration approach in dynamic navigation for implant placement: An in vitro study
    Pei, Xiyan
    Weng, Jinlong
    Sun, Feng
    Ma, Yu
    Iao, Siniong
    Liu, Xiaoqiang
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL SCIENCES, 2024, 19 (01) : 51 - 57
  • [46] Dynamic navigation-assisted flapless implant placement in the posterior mandible: a retrospective and comparative study
    Zhang, Chi
    AL-Awadhi, Zeyad A.
    Geng, Ningbo
    Mo, Shiting
    Chen, Songling
    ORAL SURGERY ORAL MEDICINE ORAL PATHOLOGY ORAL RADIOLOGY, 2025, 139 (06): : 670 - 683
  • [47] Assessment of the Accuracy of Two Different Dynamic Navigation System Registration Methods for Dental Implant Placement in the Posterior Area: An In Vitro Study
    Wei, Tai
    Ma, Feifei
    Sun, Feng
    Ma, Yu
    JOURNAL OF PERSONALIZED MEDICINE, 2023, 13 (01):
  • [48] Comparison of the positional accuracy of robotic guided dental implant placement with static guided and dynamic navigation systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Khan, Madiha
    Javed, Faizan
    Haji, Zainab
    Ghafoor, Robia
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2024, 132 (04) : 746e1 - 746e8
  • [49] Accuracy of Navigation-Guided Dental Implant Placement with Screw Versus Hand Template Fixation in the Edentulous Mandible
    Kauffmann, Philipp
    Rau, Anna
    Engelke, Wilfried
    Troeltzsch, Markus
    Brockmeyer, Phillip
    Dagmar, Lauer-Saridakis
    Cordesmeyer, Robert
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2018, 33 (02) : 383 - 388
  • [50] Comparison of the accuracy of immediate implant placement using static and dynamic computer-assisted implant system in the esthetic zone of the maxilla: a prospective study
    Feng, Yuzhang
    Su, Zhenya
    Mo, Anchun
    Yang, Xingmei
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2022, 8 (01)