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
. 2023 Jul-Dec;13(2):158-162.
doi: 10.4103/ams.ams_100_23. Epub 2024 Jan 15.

Comparison of Dental Implant Placement Accuracy Using a Static Surgical Guide, a Virtual Guide and a Manual Placement Method - An In-Vitro Study

Anna V Lysenko  1 , Andrey I Yaremenko  1 , Vladimir M Ivanov  2 , Aleksandr I Lyubimov  3 , Natalia A Leletkina  1 , Alina A Prokofeva  1
Affiliations

Comparison of Dental Implant Placement Accuracy Using a Static Surgical Guide, a Virtual Guide and a Manual Placement Method - An In-Vitro Study

Anna V Lysenko et al. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2023 Jul-Dec.

Abstract

Introduction: The use of a surgical guide during pre-operative planning significantly increases the efficiency and safety of dental implantation. However, the current widespread use of static navigation has led to a decrease in accuracy. Dynamic navigation, on the other hand, can be an alternative. This study compared the accuracy of dental implant placement on jaw models using static navigation, a virtual guide and the manual placement method.

Materials and methods: Nine patients with favourable conditions were selected, and three-dimensional full-body jaw models were set up. Group I had 21 implants placed using static navigation, Group II had 21 implants placed using dynamic navigation and Group III had 21 implants placed using the 'free hand' method. Placement accuracy was calculated by the deviation between the planned implant position and the actual position obtained from post-operative cone-beam computed tomography and model scanning.

Results: The deviation from the planned implant position was 0.4° in Group I and 0.5° in Group II. The 'free hand' method yielded the worst result, with a statistically significant difference between Groups I and II. However, implantation using dynamic navigation showed a lower variance of deviation, with the majority of implants having a deviation ≤0.5 mm (86% compared to 67% in the static navigation group).

Discussion: The accuracy of implant positioning using a virtual guide with dynamic imaging was comparable to static navigation and surpassed the accuracy obtained using the 'free hand' technique. This study highlights the potential of dynamic navigation control in dental implantology and warrants further clinical research to improve this system.

Keywords: Accuracy; augmented reality; computer-aided surgery; dental implant.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Placement of Straumann dental implants using the surgical guide with the original navigation kit
Figure 2
Figure 2
Straumann dental implants placement under dynamic navigation control
Figure 3
Figure 3
Placement of Straumann dental implants in models fixed in a special holder using the original surgical kit
Figure 4
Figure 4
Scanning of models with dental implants placed and scan markers fixed on them using an intraoral scanner
Figure 5
Figure 5
A one-case example of the results showing the comparison of the implant position with the planned position in the three study groups
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Eftekhar Ashtiani R, Ghasemi Z, Nami M, Mighani F, Namdari M. Accuracy of static digital surgical guides for dental implants based on the guide system: A systematic review. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;122:600–7. - PubMed
    1. Zhou W, Liu Z, Song L, Kuo CL, Shafer DM. Clinical factors affecting the accuracy of guided implant surgery-a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2018;18:28–40. - PubMed
    1. Garcia-Hammaker S, George FM. Use of a surgical template for minimally invasive second-stage surgery: A dental technique. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121:37–40. - PubMed
    1. Unsal GS, Turkyilmaz I, Lakhia S. Advantages and limitations of implant surgery with CAD/CAM surgical guides: A literature review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2020;12:e409–17. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wu D, Zhou L, Yang J, Zhang B, Lin Y, Chen J, et al. Accuracy of dynamic navigation compared to static surgical guide for dental implant placement. Int J Implant Dent. 2020;6:78. - PMC - PubMed