Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences) >
Accuracy of dynamic navigation system for immediate dental implant placement
Received date: 2022-10-10
Online published: 2025-01-25
Supported by
the Program of New Clinical Techniques and Therapies of Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology(PKUSSNCT-22B06)
Copyright
Objective: Dynamic navigation approaches are widely employed in the context of implant placement surgery. Implant surgery can be divided into immediate and delayed surgery according to the time of implantation. This retrospective study was developed to compare the accuracy of dynamic navigation system for immediate and delayed implantations. Methods: In the study, medical records from all patients that had undergone implant surgery between August 2019 and June 2021 in the First Clinical Division of the Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology were retrospectively reviewed. There were 97 patients [53 males and 44 females, average age (47.14±11.99) years] and 97 implants (delayed group: 51; immediate group: 46) that met with study inclusion criteria and were included. Implant placement accuracy was measured by the superposition of the planned implant position in the preoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) image and the actual implant position in the postoperative CBCT image. The 3-dimensional (3D) entry deviation (3D deviation in the coronal aspect of the alveolar ridge), 3D apex deviation (3D deviation in the apical area of the implant) and angular deviation were analyzed as the main observation index when comparing these two groups. The 2-dimensional (2D) horizontal deviation of the entry point and apex point, and the deviation of entry point depth and apex point depth were the secondary observation index. Results: The overall implant restoration survival rate was 100%, and no mechanical or biological complications were reported. The implantation success rate was 100%. The 3D entry deviation, 3D apex deviation and angular deviation of all analyzed implants were (1.146±0.458) mm, (1.276±0.526) mm, 3.022°±1.566°, respectively; while in the delayed group these respective values were (1.157±0.478) mm, (1.285±0.481) mm and 2.936°±1.470° as compared with (1.134±0.440) mm, (1.265±0.780) mm, 3.117°±1.677° in the immediate group. No significant differences (P=0.809, P=0.850, P=0.575) in accuracy were observed when comparing these two groups. Conclusion: Dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery system promotes accurate implantation, and both the immediate and delayed implantations exhibit similar levels of accuracy under dynamic navigation system that meets the clinical demands. Dynamic navigation system is feasible for immediate implantation.
Hong LI , Feifei MA , Jinlong WENG , Yang DU , Binzhang WU , Feng SUN . Accuracy of dynamic navigation system for immediate dental implant placement[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2025 , 57(1) : 85 -90 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2025.01.013
| 1 | Wei SM , Li Y , Deng K , et al. Does machine-vision-assisted dynamic navigation improve the accuracy of digitally planned prosthetically guided immediate implant placement? A randomized controlled trial[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2022, 33 (8): 804- 815. |
| 2 | Aydemir CA , Arisan V . Accuracy of dental implant placement via dynamic navigation or the freehand method: A split-mouth rando-mized controlled clinical trial[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2020, 31 (3): 255- 263. |
| 3 | Geng N , Ren J , Zhou T , et al. Clinical study of dynamic real-time navigation assisted immediate implant without flapping in the esthetic zone[J]. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2023, 124 (Suppl 1): 101278. |
| 4 | Pozzi A , Arcuri L , Kan J , et al. Navigation guided socket-shield technique for implant and pontic sites in the esthetic zone: A proof-of-concept 1-year prospective study with immediate implant placement and loading[J]. J Esthet Restor Dent, 2022, 34 (1): 203- 214. |
| 5 | Pozzi A , Arcuri L , Carosi P , et al. Clinical and radiological outcomes of novel digital workflow and dynamic navigation for single-implant immediate loading in aesthetic zone: 1-year prospective case series[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2021, 32 (12): 1397- 1410. |
| 6 | Emery RW , Merritt SA , Lank K , et al. Accuracy of dynamic navigation for dental implant placement-model-based evaluation[J]. J Oral Implantol, 2016, 42 (5): 399- 405. |
| 7 | Mischkowski RA , Zinser MJ , Neugebauer J , et al. Comparison of static and dynamic computer-assisted guidance methods in implantology[J]. Int J Comput Dent, 2006, 9 (1): 23- 35. |
| 8 | Golob DJ , Bencharit S , Carrico CK , et al. Exploring training dental implant placement using computer-guided implant navigation system for predoctoral students: A pilot study[J]. Eur J Dent Educ, 2019, 23 (4): 415- 423. |
| 9 | Wei SM , Shi JY , Qiao SC , et al. Accuracy and primary stability of tapered or straight implants placed into fresh extraction socket using dynamic navigation: A randomized controlled clinical trial[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2022, 26 (3): 2733- 2741. |
| 10 | 苏恩典, 陈莹晖, 杨松, 等. 即刻与延期种植导航手术的术者操作误差分析[J]. 临床口腔医学杂志, 2020, 36 (11): 673- 676. |
| 11 | Zhan Y , Wang M , Cheng X , et al. Evaluation of a dynamic navigation system for training students in dental implant placement[J]. J Dent Educ, 2021, 85 (2): 120- 127. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |