The accuracy of implant placement using a combination of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in fully edentulous arches: A prospective controlled clinical study
- PMID: 37750503
- DOI: 10.1111/clr.14185
The accuracy of implant placement using a combination of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in fully edentulous arches: A prospective controlled clinical study
Abstract
Objective: To compare the accuracy of implant position, using a combination of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS), with either static, dynamic, or freehand implant placement, in fully edentulous arches.
Materials and methods: Twenty-one patients with a total of 88 fixtures were included. Implants were divided equally into four groups: a combination of static and dynamic CAIS (SD group), static CAIS (S group), dynamic CAIS (D group), and freehand placement (FH group). Angular deviation, as well as the 3D platform and apex deviations, were measured for all groups. Furthermore, the direction of implant deviation was recorded and compared.
Results: The FH group showed significantly more deviation compared to all groups, considering all the aspects, and at both the implant platform and apex. A significant difference in angular deviation between the SD and S groups (p < .001), and between the SD and D groups (p < .001) was noted, favoring the SD group. When evaluating implant distribution, the FH group showed a tendency towards the buccal, apical, and distal directions at platform and apex, while in the D group, implants shifted more to the buccal. In contrast, the SD group did not show a trend toward any specific direction. The S and SD groups did not show a statistical significance considering any direction.
Conclusions: The combination of static and dynamic CAIS increases the accuracy of implant placement in fully edentulous arches when compared with either static or dynamic CAIS alone, as well as freehand placement.
Keywords: accuracy; computer‐aided design; dental implants; edentulous jaws.
© 2023 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of the accuracy of implant position among freehand implant placement, static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in fully edentulous patients: a non-randomized prospective study.Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023 Feb;52(2):264-271. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2022.05.009. Epub 2022 Jun 23. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023. PMID: 35752531
-
Accuracy and patient-centered results of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in edentulous jaws: a retrospective cohort study.Clin Oral Investig. 2023 Sep;27(9):5427-5438. doi: 10.1007/s00784-023-05161-5. Epub 2023 Jul 22. Clin Oral Investig. 2023. PMID: 37480368
-
Accuracy of implant placement using a mixed reality-based dynamic navigation system versus static computer-assisted and freehand surgery: An in Vitro study.J Dent. 2024 Jul;146:105052. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105052. Epub 2024 May 9. J Dent. 2024. PMID: 38734298
-
Can computer-assisted implant surgery improve clinical outcomes and reduce the frequency and intensity of complications in implant dentistry? A critical review.Periodontol 2000. 2022 Oct;90(1):197-223. doi: 10.1111/prd.12458. Epub 2022 Aug 4. Periodontol 2000. 2022. PMID: 35924457 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Impact of digital technologies on implant surgery in fully edentulous patients: A scoping review.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024 Aug;35(8):1000-1010. doi: 10.1111/clr.14268. Epub 2024 Apr 13. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024. PMID: 38613432
Cited by
-
Immediate implant placement in the posterior mandibular region was assisted by dynamic real-time navigation: a retrospective study.BMC Oral Health. 2024 Feb 9;24(1):208. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-03947-x. BMC Oral Health. 2024. PMID: 38336661 Free PMC article.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Arisan, V., Karabuda, C. Z., & Ozdemir, T. (2010). Implant surgery using bone‐ and mucosa‐supported stereolithographic guides in totally edentulous jaws: Surgical and post‐operative outcomes of computer‐aided vs. standard techniques. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 21, 980–988.
-
- Aydemir, C. A., & Arısan, V. (2020). Accuracy of dental implant placement via dynamic navigation or the freehand method: A split‐mouth randomized controlled clinical trial. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 31, 255–263.
-
- Bhering, C. L., Mesquita, M. F., Kemmoku, D. T., Noritomi, P. Y., Consani, R. L., & Barão, V. A. (2016). Comparison between all‐on‐four and all‐on‐six treatment concepts and framework material on stress distribution in atrophic maxilla: A prototyping guided 3D‐FEA study. Materials Science & Engineering C, Materials for Biological Applications, 69, 715–725.
-
- Block, M. S., & Emery, R. W. (2016). Static or dynamic navigation for implant placement‐choosing the method of guidance. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 74, 269–277.
-
- Block, M. S., Emery, R. W., Lank, K., & Ryan, J. (2017). Implant placement accuracy using dynamic navigation. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 32, 92–99.
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous