Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Nov 24;6(1):78.
doi: 10.1186/s40729-020-00272-0.

Accuracy of dynamic navigation compared to static surgical guide for dental implant placement

Dong Wu  1 , Lin Zhou  2 , Jin Yang  3 , Bao Zhang  4 , Yanjun Lin  4 , Jiang Chen  4 , Wenxiu Huang  5 , Yonghui Chen  6
Affiliations

Accuracy of dynamic navigation compared to static surgical guide for dental implant placement

Dong Wu et al. Int J Implant Dent. .

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the accuracy of dynamic navigation (DN) with a static surgical guide (SSG) for dental implant placement and the influence factors such as the experience of the surgeon and the implant sites.

Methods and materials: A total of 38 implants, which underwent the dynamic navigation, and 57 implants which underwent a static surgical guide were enrolled in the retrospective study. Coronal deviation, apical deviation, and angular deviation were compared between the DN and SSG groups, along with the different experience level of surgeons and implant sites in the DN group.

Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the DN and SSG groups, and the experience level of the surgeons and implant sites in the DN group. However, the apical deviation of the DN was slightly higher than the SSG group in the anterior teeth (P = 0.028), and the angular deviation of DN was smaller than the SSG group in the molar.

Conclusion: Dynamic navigation can achieve accurate implant placement as well as the static surgical guide. Additionally, the experience level of the surgeon and implant site do not influence the accuracy of dynamic navigation, while the accuracy of DN seems higher than the SSG in molar.

Keywords: Accuracy; Dental implants; Dynamic navigation; Implant site; Static surgical guide; Surgeon experience.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Dong Wu, Lin Zhou, Jin Yang, Bao Zhang, Yanjun Lin, Jiang Chen, Wenxiu Huang, and Yonghui Chen declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The process of dynamic navigation. a The registration device was fixed onto the operating arch with a silicone elastomer when taking the CBCT scanning. b The optimal 3D implant position was planned in the dental implant navigation system software. c Matching the reference device. d Matching the registration plate with the handpiece. e The view of matching the registration plate in the software. f The process of drilling under navigation. g The view of real-time tracking under navigation in the software. h Oral image of implant placement
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The process of static surgical guidance. a The design of the implant optimal position. b The surgical guide template was inserted and controlled for stability of the implant position. c Using the drill to preparation. d Oral image of implant placement
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
The schematic diagram of measurement accuracy
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
The coronal deviation, apical deviation, and angular deviation of the dynamic navigation and static surgical guide
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
The coronal deviation, apical deviation, and angular deviation of different surgeons in the dynamic navigation group
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
The coronal deviation, apical deviation, and angular deviation of different implant sites in the dynamic navigation group
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Comparison of the coronal deviation, apical deviation, and angular deviation of the dynamic navigation with the static surgical guide in different implant sites. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Marcantonio C, Nicoli LG, Junior EM, et al. Prevalence and possible risk factors of peri-implantitis: a concept review. J Contemporary Dental Practice. 2015;16(9):750–757. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1752. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Panchal N, Mahmood L, Retana A, et al. Dynamic navigation for dental implant surgery. Oral and maxillofacial surgery clinics of North America. 2019;31(4):539–547. doi: 10.1016/j.coms.2019.08.001. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Buser D, Bornstein MM, Weber HP, et al. Early implant placement with simultaneous guided bone regeneration following single-tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: a cross-sectional, retrospective study in 45 subjects with a 2- to 4-year follow-up. J Periodontol. 2008;79(9):1773–1781. doi: 10.1902/jop.2008.080071. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Buser D, Halbritter S, Hart C, et al. Early implant placement with simultaneous guided bone regeneration following single-tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: 12-month results of a prospective study with 20 consecutive patients. J Periodontol. 2009;80(1):152–162. doi: 10.1902/jop.2009.080360. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Buser D, Wittneben J, Bornstein MM, et al. Stability of contour augmentation and esthetic outcomes of implant-supported single crowns in the esthetic zone: 3-year results of a prospective study with early implant placement postextraction. J Periodontol. 2011;82(3):342–349. doi: 10.1902/jop.2010.100408. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources