Accuracy of implant placement via dynamic navigation and autonomous robotic computer-assisted implant surgery methods: A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Optimal implant planning and placement allows the prosthesis to be well designed to achieve a satisfactory aesthetic and functional outcome. We aimed to compare deviations between implant planning and placement with the assistance of dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (d-CAIS) or autonomous robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) methods in a clinical setting. METHODS: The retrospective analysis of medical records between 2021 July and 2022 December was conducted to compare the implantation accuracy of the d-CAIS and r-CAIS system in partially edentulous patients through cone-beam computed tomography. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to check the data distribution. Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test was used as appropriate, with a defined significant difference (p < .05). RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were analysed (124 implants), with 38 patients (62 implants) in the d-CAIS group and 39 patients (62 implants) in the r-CAIS group. The differences between d-CAIS and r-CAIS were 4.09 ± 1.79° versus 1.37 ± 0.92° (p < .001) in angular deviation; 1.25 ± 0.54 versus 0.68 ± 0.36 mm (p < .001) in coronal global deviation; 1.39 ± 0.52 versus 0.69 ± 0.36 mm (p < .001) in apical global deviation; the results of the PROMs showed no statistical difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: r-CAIS allows more accurate implant placement than the d-CAIS technology. And both groups achieved overall satisfactory outcomes via VAS (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2300072004).

The impacts of registration-and-fixation device positioning on the performance of implant placement assisted by dynamic computer-aided surgery: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of dynamic computer-aided surgery (dCAS) in replacing a single missing posterior tooth, we compare outcomes when using registration-and-fixation devices positioned anterior or posterior to the surgical site. Registration is performed on either the anterior or opposite posterior teeth. METHODS: Forty individuals needing posterior single-tooth implant placement were randomly assigned to anterior or posterior registration. Nine parameters were analyzed to detect the deviations between planned and actual implant placement, using Mann-Whitney and t-tests for nonnormally and normally distributed data, respectively. RESULTS: The overall average angular deviation for this study was 2.08 ± 1.12°, with the respective average 3D platform and apex deviations of 0.77 ± 0.32 mm and 0.88 ± 0.32 mm. Angular deviation values for individuals in the anterior and posterior registration groups were 1.58°(IQR: 0.98°-2.38°) and 2.25°(IQR: 1.46°-3.43°), respectively (p = .165), with 3D platform deviations of 0.81 ± 0.29 mm and 0.74 ± 0.36 mm (p = .464), as well as 3D apex deviations of 0.89 ± 0.32 mm and 0.88 ± 0.33 mm (p = .986). No significant variations in absolute buccolingual (platform, p = .659; apex, p = .063), apicocoronal (platform, p = .671; apex, p = .649), or mesiodistal (platform, p = .134; apex, p = .355) deviations were observed at either analyzed levels. CONCLUSIONS: Both anterior and posterior registration approaches facilitate accurate dCAS-mediated implant placement for single missing posterior teeth. The device's placement (posterior-to or anterior-to the surgical site) did not affect the clinician's ability to achieve the planned implant location.

Accuracy and patient-centered results of marker-based and marker-free registrations for dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare implant placement accuracy and patient-centered results between the dynamic computer-assisted implant surgeries (d-CAISs) using marker-based and marker-free registration methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A double-armed, single-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted, in which 34 patients requiring single implant placement at the esthetic zone were randomly assigned to the marker-based (n = 17) or marker-free (n = 17) groups. The marker-based registration was performed using a splint containing radiopaque markers, while the marker-free registration used natural teeth. The primary outcome assessed implant positioning accuracy via angular and linear deviations between preoperative and postoperative implant positions in CBCT. Patients were also surveyed about the intraoperative experience and oral health impact profile (OHIP). RESULTS: The global linear deviations at the implant platform (0.82 ± 0.28 and 0.85 ± 0.41 mm) and apex (1.28 ± 0.34 and 0.85 (IQR: 0.64-1.50) mm) for the marker-based and marker-free groups respectively showed no significant difference. However, the angular deviation of the marker-free group (2.77 ± 0.92 ° ) was significantly lower than the marker-based group (4.28 ± 1.58 ° ). There was no significant difference in the mean postoperative OHIP scores between the two groups (p = .758), with scores of 2.74 ± 1.21 for marker-based and 2.93 ± 2.18 for marker-free groups, indicating mild oral health-related impairment in both. Notably, patients in the marker-free group showed significantly higher satisfaction (p = .031) with the treatment procedures. CONCLUSIONS: D-CAIS with a marker-free registration method for single implantation in the anterior maxilla has advantages in improving implant placement accuracy and patients' satisfaction, without generating a significant increase in clinical time and expenses.

A laboratory study comparing the static navigation technique using a bur with a conventional freehand technique using ultrasonic tips for the removal of fibre posts.

AIM: There are currently no high-quality studies comparing the static navigation technique with conventional methods of fibre post removal. The aim of this ex vivo study was to compare the effectiveness of fibre post removal between a static navigation technique and a conventional freehand technique using ultrasonics by experienced and inexperienced operators. METHODOLOGY: Forty-eight extracted single-rooted human premolars were root-filled. A fibre post was cemented in all 48 teeth, which were then divided randomly into the following groups: static navigation group using burs; static navigation-ultrasonic group; and non-guided group using ultrasonic tips. The following parameters were evaluated for both experienced operators and inexperienced operators: reaching the gutta-percha root filling successfully, the time required to remove the entire post, the occurrence of lateral root perforations, and the amount of root dentine removed. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to examine the normality of the data; the anova test was used to compare the significant differences among groups; and Tukey tests were used for all two-by-two comparisons. The significance level was set at 0.05. RESULTS: In the static navigation group, the gutta-percha was reached significantly more frequently than in the non-guided group (p < .05). The static navigation approach required significantly less time than the non-guided approach to reach the gutta-percha (p < .05). The total removal of posts was significantly different between groups (p < .05), but there was no significant difference between experienced and inexperienced operators in the static navigation group (p > .05). More perforations were associated with the non-guided group than with the other two groups. The total mean loss of dentine in the non-guided group in all directions was 0.39 (±0.17) mm, with 0.25 (±0.09) mm for experienced, and 0.42 (±0.16) mm for inexperienced operators. CONCLUSION: When compared to a conventional ultrasonic technique for the removal of fibre posts, the static navigation method using burs resulted in less dentine removal, more rapid access to the gutta-percha root filling, less overall time to remove the posts, and fewer complications. When using static navigation, there was no difference in performance between experienced and inexperienced operators.

Dynamically guided transantral piezoelectric endodontic microsurgery: A case report with technical considerations.

AIM: Endodontic microsurgery (EMS) of maxillary molars may represent a complex challenge to the clinician due to the location of the roots and the proximity of the maxillary sinus floor. This report aimed to describe the simultaneous use of a computer-assisted dynamic navigation (C-ADN) system and piezoelectric bony-window osteotomy for the transantral microsurgical approach of a maxillary left first molar with adequate root canal filling and symptomatic apical periodontitis. SUMMARY: This case report highlights the importance of C-ADN to carry out a minimally invasive buccal surgical access to palatal roots affected by apical periodontitis and provides a practical example to help clinicians make treatment decisions based on the available evidence. Clinical and tomographic evaluations were performed before the surgical procedure and at 24-month follow-up. This case was treated using a C-ADN system fitted to a piezotome for the buccal approach of the buccal roots, maxillary sinus membrane lifting, and for transantral location, root-end resection, cavity preparation, and filling of the palatal root. The navigation system allowed to achieve an accurate apical canal terminus location and root-end filling of the three roots with a minimally invasive piezoelectric crypt approach. At the 24-month follow-up examination, the patient remains asymptomatic, with normal periapical structures, and regeneration of maxillary sinus walls. It was concluded that the combination of dynamic navigation with piezoelectric bony-window osteotomy offers enhanced accuracy, tissue preservation, diminished risk of iatrogenic complications, and could maximize success and survival rates in transantral EMS.

Comparing accuracy in guided endodontics: dynamic real-time navigation, static guides, and manual approaches for access cavity preparation - an in vitro study using 3D printed teeth.

OBJECTIVES: To assess root canal localization accuracy using a dynamic approach, surgical guides and freehand technique in vitro. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Access cavities were prepared for 4 different 3D printed tooth types by 4 operators (n = 144). Deviations from the planning in angle and bur positioning were compared and operating time as well as tooth substance loss were evaluated (Kruskal-Wallis Test, ANOVA). Operating method, tooth type, and operator effects were analyzed (partial eta-squared statistic). RESULTS: Angle deviation varied significantly between the operating methods (p < .0001): freehand (9.53 ± 6.36°), dynamic (2.82 ± 1.8°) and static navigation (1.12 ± 0.85°). The highest effect size was calculated for operating method (ηP²=0.524), followed by tooth type (0.364), and operator (0.08). Regarding deviation of bur base and tip localization no significant difference was found between the methods. Operating method mainly influenced both parameters (ηP²=0.471, 0.379) with minor effects of tooth type (0.157) and operator. Freehand technique caused most substance loss (p < .001), dynamic navigation least (p < .0001). Operating time was the shortest for freehand followed by static and dynamic navigation. CONCLUSIONS: Guided endodontic access may aid in precise root canal localization and save tooth structure. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although guided endodontic access preparation may require more time compared to the freehand technique, the guided navigation is more accurate and saves tooth structure.

Does dynamic navigation assisted student training improve the accuracy of dental implant placement by postgraduate dental students: an in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of implant placement in models and satisfaction in dynamic navigation assisted postgraduate dental students training. METHODS: Postgraduate dental students who had at least one year of dental clinical practice with no experience in dental implant surgeries were included. Students were instructed to make treatment plans in the dynamic navigation system. Each student placed two maxillary right incisors, using freehand approach at first and then under dynamic navigation. The implant position was compared with treatment plan. Factors influencing the accuracy of implants placed under dynamic navigation were analyzed. Student acceptance towards the training and use of dynamic navigation was recorded using a questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 21 students placed 42 implants. For freehand implant placement, the median entry point deviation, apex point deviation, and implant axis deviation was 3.79 mm, 4.32 mm, and 10.08°. For dynamic guided implant placement, the median entry point deviation, apex point deviation, and implant axis deviation was 1.29 mm, 1.25 mm, and 4.89° (p < 0.001). The accuracy of dynamic guided implant was not influenced by student gender or familiarity with computer games. All students were satisfied with the training. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic navigation system assisted students in improving the accuracy of implant placement and was well accepted by students.

Navigation-based endoscopic enucleation (NBEE) of large mandibular cystic lesions involving the ramus.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to present an innovative surgical protocol, navigation-based endoscopic enucleation (NBEE) for the treatment of large mandibular cystic lesions involving the mandibular ramus. METHODS: Twelve patients who presented with a large mandibular cystic lesion involving the mandibular ramus were enrolled in this study. Preoperative planning and intraoperative navigation were performed in all 12 patients. RESULTS: All patients in this study were treated with navigation-based endoscopic enucleation successfully. The follow-up period ranged from 7 to 10 months. Bone regenerated was found in all patients postoperatively. Three patients experienced temporary mandibular nerve palsy, and all relieved within 2 months. No pathological bone fracture was found during surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The use of navigation-based endoscopic enucleation (NBEE) for the treatment of large mandibular cystic lesions involving the ramus proved to be an effective method for complete and precise enucleation of the cystic lesion that also preserved the surrounding tissue.

Accuracy and efficiency of dynamic navigated root-end resection in endodontic surgery: a pilot in vitro study.

BACKGROUND: The operation accuracy and efficiency of dynamic navigated endodontic surgery were evaluated through in vitro experiments. This study provides a reference for future clinical application of dynamic navigation systems in endodontic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 3D-printed maxillary anterior teeth were used in the preparation of models for endodontic surgery. Endodontic surgery was performed with and without dynamic navigation by an operator who was proficient in dynamic navigation technology but had no experience in endodontic surgery. Optical scanning data were applied to evaluate the length and angle deviations of root-end resection. And the operation time was recorded. T tests were used to analyze the effect of dynamic navigation technology on the accuracy and duration of endodontic surgery. RESULTS: With dynamic navigation, the root-end resection length deviation was 0.46 ± 0.06 mm, the angle deviation was 2.45 ± 0.96°, and the operation time was 187 ± 22.97 s. Without dynamic navigation, the root-end resection length deviation was 1.20 ± 0.92 mm, the angle deviation was 16.20 ± 9.59°, and the operation time was 247 ± 61.47 s. Less deviation was achieved and less operation time was spent with than without dynamic navigation (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The application of a dynamic navigation system in endodontic surgery can improve the accuracy and efficiency significantly for operators without surgical experience and reduce the operation time.

Does dynamic navigation system preserve more dentine? - A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to comparatively analyse the amount of dentin removal by free hand and static guided endodontics with dynamic navigation system (DNS) in endodontic access cavity preparation. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Based on the structured PICO framework of "Comparative evaluation of dynamic navigation system (I) to freehand (C) and static guided endodontics (C) in endodontic access cavity preparation on the preservation of tooth structure (O) when assessed on permanent human teeth (P)", the keywords were formulated and the articles were retrieved from three databases namely PubMed, Scopus and Embase, based on the keywords from the time of inception of DNS till June 2023. The risk of bias assessment was done using a modified Joanne Briggs Institute checklist, which evaluated domains such as randomisation, sample size, image acquisition using CBCT, angulation, accuracy and time taken. As the data was heterogenous, a quantitative meta-analysis was not performed. RESULTS: Initially, 174 articles were retrieved from the three databases, 30 duplicates were removed, after title check 108 articles were excluded and following abstract check only 10 articles qualified for full text analysis. On reviewing the 10 full text articles, 5 articles were excluded and the remaining 5 articles were subjected to the risk of bias analysis which showed that 2 articles displayed low risk of bias and three articles showed high risk of bias. The RoB analysis revealed that only 2 studies evaluated the preservation of dentin in terms of accuracy, angulation and time taken proving the increased precision with minimal loss of tooth structure using DNS. In both the studies, DNS proved to be superior to free hand technique in terms of precision, accuracy and efficiency in locating the canals during access cavity preparation with maximal preservation of tooth structure. CONCLUSION: With the minimal literature evidences, the present systematic review highlights maximal preservation of dentin using DNS. However, further invitro and invivo studies comparing the free hand, static guided endodontics to DNS must be carried out for its translation into clinical practice. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Dynamic navigation system provides maximal preservation of dentin during access cavity preparation.

Accuracy of implant placement with computer-aided static, dynamic, and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials.

This systematic review explores the accuracy of computerized guided implant placement including computer-aided static, dynamic, and robot-assisted surgery. An electronic search up to February 28, 2023, was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases using the search terms "surgery", "computer-assisted", "dynamic computer-assisted", "robotic surgical procedures", and "dental implants". The outcome variables were discrepancies including the implant's 3D-coronal, -apical and -angular deviations. Articles were selectively retrieved according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the data were quantitatively meta-analysed to verify the study outcomes. Sixty-seven articles were finally identified and included for analysis. The accuracy comparison revealed an overall mean deviation at the entry point of 1.11 mm (95% CI: 1.02-1.19), and 1.40 mm (95% CI: 1.31-1.49) at the apex, and the angulation was 3.51˚ (95% CI: 3.27-3.75). Amongst computerized guided implant placements, the robotic system tended to show the lowest deviation (0.81 mm in coronal deviation, 0.77 mm in apical deviation, and 1.71˚ in angular deviation). No significant differences were found between the arch type and flap operation in cases of dynamic navigation. The fully-guided protocol demonstrated a significantly higher level of accuracy compared to the pilot-guided protocol, but did not show any significant difference when compared to the partially guided protocol. The use of computerized technology clinically affirms that operators can accurately place implants in three directions. Several studies agree that a fully guided protocol is the gold standard in clinical practice.

Analysis of the Application Value of Dynamic Navigation Guidance in Oral Implantation.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the application of dynamic navigation guidance technology in different implantation scenarios, and to provide a scientific basis for the innovation and advancement of implantation techniques. METHODS: Fifteen cases of patients with malocclusions admitted between January 2021 and February 2023 were selected as the study subjects. All patients underwent dynamic navigation-guided oral implantation interventions. CBCT scans were taken after implantation surgery to record deviations of implantation points, including implantation point deviation, endpoint deviation, and angle deviation. RESULTS: Dynamic navigation guidance effectively improves the reliability and stability of implantation in oral implant patients. CBCT effectively evaluated the state of the patient's periodontal implant, analyzed the state of the patient's lesion area, and improved the quality of implant intervention through CBCT guidance. The implantation point deviation was (0.407±0.193) mm, the endpoint deviation was (0.492±0.201) mm, and the implant angle deviation was (2.162±0.283)°. There was no significant difference in implantation point deviation in the anterior and posterior parts of the upper and lower jaws after intervention (P>0.05). However, there were significant differences in endpoint deviation and implant angle deviation among the anterior and posterior parts of the upper and lower jaws (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Dynamic navigation guidance effectively improves the reliability and stability of implantation in oral implant patients. However, there is relatively greater endpoint deviation and implant angle deviation in the posterior part of the upper jaw.

Surgical performance of dental students using computer-assisted dynamic navigation and freehand approaches.

INTRODUCTION: Nowadays, the training of implant placement has shifted from once entirely instructor-student teaching to the increasing use of computer-assisted simulation. Based on computerized virtual planning, dynamic navigation has been used for implant placement with higher accuracy than the traditional freehand protocol. However, whether dynamic navigation benefits to the training of dental students in implant placement remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the surgical performance of dental students in implant placement using computer-assisted dynamic navigation and freehand approaches. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 20 dental students (6 males, 14 females, age: 25.6 ± 0.5 years) were enrolled in this study. With the traditional freehand approach (training 1) as the control protocol, computer-assisted dynamic navigation (training 2) was used in the training of dental students in implant placement. For each training, both the operating time (OT) of students and placement accuracy represented by the linear (at the implant platform, Dpl, and apex, Dap) and angular (Dan) deviations between the virtually planned and placed implants were recorded. Statistical comparisons were made between the two training protocols as well as male and female surgeons. RESULTS: OT2 was around twice of OT1 (p < .0001), whereas Dan1 was almost three times of Dan2 (p < .0001). Dap1 and Dpl1 were significantly higher than Dap2 (p = .014) and Dpl2 (p = .033) respectively. Besides, male students showed statistically higher Dpl1 (p = .033) and Dan1 (p = .002) than females. No significant difference was found between male and female students in OT1, OT2, Dpl2, Dap1, Dap2 and Dan2. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, the use of computer-assisted dynamic navigation in the preclinical training could improve the surgical performance of the dental students in implant placement. The combination of dynamic navigation with the traditional preclinical surgical training may benefit to dental students and could be applied in dental education.

Prosthetically driven robot-assisted implant surgery: turning a major failure into a simple case.

This case report presents a challenging case of catastrophic failure of a fixed partial denture involving fracture of the prosthesis as well as supporting implants and teeth. The use of robotics facilitated efficient and successful restoration of the patient's dentition. After extraction of 2 fractured teeth and 1 fractured implant, 2 new implants were placed with haptic guidance from robotics, which allowed for stable osteotomies and high initial implant stability quotients. Due to the patient's tremors and heavy occlusal forces, restoration was delayed to allow the surgical site to heal, and the patient received a provisional partial denture. With subsequent placement of the final restoration, the treatment was fully completed in 4.5 months and required only a single surgical procedure. The use of haptic robotics in this case allowed for accurate planning, spacing, and placement of screw-retained implants with an optimal arch, leading to the best long-term outcome for the patient.

A Novel Technique for Basilar Invagination Treatment in a Patient with Klippel-Feil Syndrome: A Clinical Example and Brief Literature Review.

Objectives and Background: To present a novel technique of treatment for a patient with basilar invagination. Basilar invagination (BI) is a congenital condition that can compress the cervicomedullary junction, leading to neurological deficits. Severe cases require surgical intervention, but there is debate over the choice of approach. The anterior approach allows direct decompression but carries high complication rates, while the posterior approach provides indirect decompression and offers good stability with fewer complications. Materials and Methods: A 15-year-old boy with severe myelopathy presented to our hospital with neck pain, bilateral upper limb muscle weakness, and hand numbness persisting for 4 years. Additionally, he experienced increased numbness and gait disturbance three months before his visit. On examination, he exhibited hyperreflexia in both upper and lower limbs, muscle weakness in the bilateral upper limbs (MMT 4), bilateral hypoesthesia below the elbow and in both legs, mild urinary and bowel incontinence, and a spastic gait. Radiographs revealed severe basilar invagination (BI). Preoperative images showed severe BI and that the spinal cord was severely compressed with odontoid process. Results: The patient underwent posterior surgery with the C-arm free technique. All screws including occipital screws were inserted into the adequate position under navigation guidance. Reduction was achieved with skull rotation and distraction. A follow-up at one year showed the following results: Manual muscle testing results and sensory function tests showed almost full recovery, with bilateral arm recovery (MMT 5) and smooth walking. The cervical Japanese Orthopedic Association score of the patient improved from 9/17 to 16/17. Postoperative images showed excellent spinal cord decompression, and no major or severe complications had occurred. Conclusions: Basilar invagination alongside Klippel-Feil syndrome represents a relatively uncommon condition. Utilizing a posterior approach for treating reducible BI with a C-arm-free technique proved to be a safe method in addressing severe myelopathy. This novel navigation technique yields excellent outcomes for patients with BI.

Augmented Reality in Spine Surgery: A Case Study of Atlantoaxial Instrumentation in Os Odontoideum.

Despite advancement in surgical innovation, C1-C2 fixation remains challenging due to risks of screw malposition and vertebral artery (VA) injuries. Traditional image-based navigation, while useful, often demands that surgeons frequently shift their attention to external monitors, potentially causing distractions. In this article, we introduce a microscope-based augmented reality (AR) navigation system that projects both anatomical information and real-time navigation images directly onto the surgical field. In the present case report, we discuss a 37-year-old female who suffered from os odontoideum with C1-C2 subluxation. Employing AR-assisted navigation, the patient underwent the successful posterior instrumentation of C1-C2. The integrated AR system offers direct visualization, potentially minimizing surgical distractions. In our opinion, as AR technology advances, its adoption in surgical practices and education is anticipated to expand.

Minimal invasiveness at dental implant placement: A systematic review with meta-analyses on flapless fully guided surgery.

Flapless and fully guided implant placement has the potential to maximize efficacy outcomes and at the same time to minimize surgical invasiveness. The aim of the current systematic review was to answer the following PICO question: "In adult human subjects undergoing dental implant placement (P), is minimally invasive flapless computer-aided fully guided (either dynamic or static computer-aided implant placement (sCAIP)) (I) superior to flapped conventional (free-handed implant placement (FHIP) or cast-based/drill partially guided implant placement (dPGIP)) surgery (C), in terms of efficacy, patient morbidity, long-term prognosis, and costs (O)?" Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) fulfilling specific inclusion criteria established to answer the PICO question were included. Two review authors independently searched for eligible studies, screened the titles and abstracts, performed full-text analysis, extracted the data from the published reports, and performed the risk of bias assessment. In cases of disagreement, a third review author took the final decision during ad hoc consensus meetings. The study results were summarized using random effects meta-analyses, which were based (wherever possible) on individual patient data (IPD). A total of 10 manuscripts reporting on five RCTs, involving a total of 124 participants and 449 implants, and comparing flapless sCAIP with flapped FHIP/cast-based partially guided implant placement (cPGIP), were included. There was no RCT analyzing flapless dynamic computer-aided implant placement (dCAIP) or flapped dPGIP. Intergroup meta-analyses indicated less depth deviation (difference in means (MD) = -0.28 mm; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.59 to 0.03; moderate certainty), angular deviation (MD = -3.88 degrees; 95% CI: -7.00 to -0.77; high certainty), coronal (MD = -0.6 mm; 95% CI: -1.21 to 0.01; low certainty) and apical (MD = -0.75 mm; 95% CI: -1.43 to -0.07; moderate certainty) three-dimensional bodily deviations, postoperative pain (MD = -17.09 mm on the visual analogue scale (VAS); 95% CI: -33.38 to -0.80; low certainty), postoperative swelling (MD = -6.59 mm on the VAS; 95% CI: -19.03 to 5.85; very low certainty), intraoperative discomfort (MD = -9.36 mm on the VAS; 95% CI: -17.10 to -1.61) and surgery duration (MD = -24.28 minutes; 95% CI: -28.62 to -19.95) in flapless sCAIP than in flapped FHIP/cPGIP. Despite being more accurate than flapped FHIP/cPGIP, flapless sCAIP still resulted in deviations with respect to the planned position (intragroup meta-analytic means: 0.76 mm in depth, 2.57 degrees in angular, 1.43 mm in coronal, and 1.68 in apical three-dimensional bodily position). Moreover, flapless sCAIP presented a 12% group-specific intraoperative complication rate, resulting in an inability to place the implant with this protocol in 7% of cases. Evidence regarding more clinically relevant outcomes of efficacy (implant survival and success, prosthetically and biologically correct positioning), long-term prognosis, and costs, is currently scarce. When the objective is to guarantee minimal invasiveness at implant placement, clinicians could consider the use of flapless sCAIP. A proper case selection and consideration of a safety margin are, however, suggested.

The accuracy of dynamic computer assisted implant surgery in fully edentulous jaws: A retrospective case series.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the accuracy of implant placement using a dynamic navigation system in fully edentulous jaws and to analyze the influence of implant distribution on implant position accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Edentulous patients who received implant placement using a dynamic navigation system were included. Four to six mini screws were placed in the edentulous jaw under local anesthesia as fiducial markers. Then patients received CBCT scans. Virtual implant positions were designed in the planning software based on CBCT data. Under local anesthesia, implants were inserted under the guidance of the dynamic navigation system. CBCTs were taken following implant placement. The deviation between the actual and planned implant positions was measured by comparing the pre- and postsurgery CBCT. RESULTS: A total of 13 edentulous patients with 13 edentulous maxillae and 7 edentulous mandibles were included, and 108 implants were placed. The average linear deviations at the implant entry point and apex were 1.08 ± 0.52 mm and 1.15 ± 0.60 mm, respectively. The average angular deviation was 2.85 ± 1.20°. No significant difference was detected in linear and angular deviations between the maxillary and mandibular implants, neither between the anterior and posterior implants. CONCLUSIONS: The dynamic navigation system provides high accuracy for implant placement in fully edentulous jaws, while the distribution of the implants showed little impact on implant position accuracy.

Accuracy of different registration areas using active and passive dynamic navigation systems in dental implant surgery: An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To gauge the relative accuracy of the use of passive and active dynamic navigation systems when placing dental implants, and to determine how registration areas affect the performance of these systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty implants were assigned to be placed into 40 total resin mandible models missing either the left or right first molars using either passive or active dynamic navigation system approaches. U-shaped tube registration devices were fixed in the edentulous site for 20 models each on the left or right side. Planned and actual implant positions were superimposed to assess procedural accuracy, and parameters including 3D entry deviation, angular deviation, and 3D apex deviation were evaluated with Mann-Whitney U tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. RESULTS: Respective angular, entry, and apex deviation values of 1.563 ± 0.977°, 0.725 ± 0.268 mm, and 0.808 ± 0.284 mm were calculated for all included implants, with corresponding values of 1.388 ± 1.090°, 0.789 ± 0.285 mm, and 0.846 ± 0.301 mm in the active group and 1.739 ± 0.826°, 0.661 ± 0.236 mm, and 0.769 ± 0.264 mm in the passive group. Only angular deviation differed significantly among groups, and the registration area was not associated with any significant differences among groups. CONCLUSIONS: Passive and active dynamic navigation approaches can achieve comparable in vitro accuracy. Registration on one side of the missing single posterior tooth area in the mandible can complete single-tooth implantation on both sides of the posterior teeth, highlighting the promise of further clinical research focused on this topic.

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

OBJECTIVES: To 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. METHODS: A 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. RESULTS: Thirty 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°; 95% CI: 2.85 to 5.19) and the FH (7.97°; 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. CONCLUSION: dCAIS 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.