Comparison of the accuracy of immediate implant placement using static and dynamic computer-assisted implant system in the esthetic zone of the maxilla: a prospective study

被引:21
|
作者
Feng, Yuzhang [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Su, Zhenya [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Mo, Anchun [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Yang, Xingmei [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Sichuan Univ, State Key Lab Oral Dis, 14 Sect 3,Renmin Nan Rd, Chengdu, Sichuan, Peoples R China
[2] Sichuan Univ, Natl Clin Res Ctr Oral Dis, 14Sect 3,Renmin Nan Rd, Chengdu, Sichuan, Peoples R China
[3] Sichuan Univ, West China Hosp Stomatol, Dept Oral Implantol, 14 Sect 3,Renmin Nan Rd, Chengdu, Sichuan, Peoples R China
关键词
Accuracy; Computer-assisted surgery; Dental implant; Immediate implant placement; Dynamic navigation; Static template; TECHNOLOGY APPLICATIONS; SURGICAL GUIDES; SURGERY; DENTISTRY; EXTRACTION; TOLERANCE; ERRORS;
D O I
10.1186/s40729-022-00464-w
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of fully guided between dynamic and static computer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS) systems for immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone. Methods: A total of 40 qualified patients requiring immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone were randomly and equally assigned to either static CAIS group (n = 20) or dynamic CAIS groups (n = 20). Global deviations at entry, apex, and angular deviation between placed and planned implant position were measured and compared as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes were the deviation of implant placement at mesial-distal, labial-palatal, and coronal-apical directions. Results: For the immediate implant placement, the mean global entry deviations in static and dynamic CAIS groups were 0.99 +/- 0.63 mm and 1.06 +/- 0.55 mm (p = 0.659), while the mean global apex deviations were 1.50 +/- 0.75 mm and 1.18 +/- 0.53 mm (p = 0.231), respectively. The angular deviation in the static and dynamic CAIS group was 3.07 +/- 2.18 degrees and 3.23 +/- 1.67 degrees (p = 0.547). No significant differences were observed for the accuracy parameters of immediate implant placement between static and dynamic CAIS systems, except the deviation of the implant at entry in the labial-palatal direction in the dynamic CAIS group was significantly more labial than of the static CAIS (p = 0.005). Conclusions: This study demonstrated that clinically acceptable accuracy of immediate implant placement could be achieved using static and dynamic CAIS systems.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Immediate Implant Placement in the Esthetic Zone Using a Novel Tapered Implant Design and a Digital Integrated Workflow: A Case Series
    Pariente, Leon
    Dada, Karim
    Linder, Susy
    Dard, Michel
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERIODONTICS & RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2023, 43 (05) : 578 - 587
  • [42] Accuracy of keyless vs drill-key implant systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery using two guide-hole designs compared to freehand implant placement: an in vitro study
    Clemens Raabe
    Tabea S. Schuetz
    Vivianne Chappuis
    Burak Yilmaz
    Samir Abou-Ayash
    Emilio Couso-Queiruga
    International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 9
  • [43] Accuracy of dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in fully edentulous patients: An in vitro study
    Ruiz-Romero, Victor
    Jorba-Garcia, Adria
    Camps-Font, Octavi
    Figueiredo, Rui
    Valmaseda-Castellon, Eduard
    JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2024, 149
  • [44] The accuracy of different macrogeometry of dental implant in dynamic navigation guided immediate implant placement in the maxillary aesthetic zone: an in vitro study
    Chen, Jinyan
    Yu, Xinbo
    Wu, Yiqun
    Wang, Feng
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2025, 11 (01)
  • [45] Comparison of precision of implant placement between two different guided systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery: A simulation-based experimental study
    Pattanasirikun, Papon
    Arunjaroensuk, Sirida
    Panya, Sappasith
    Subbalekha, Keskanya
    Mattheos, Nikos
    Pimkhaokham, Atiphan
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL SCIENCES, 2024, 19 : S38 - S43
  • [46] Accuracy of Different Surgical Guide Designs for Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: An In Vitro Study
    Wu, Yu Tsung
    Papaspyridakos, Panos
    Kang, Kiho
    Finkelman, Matthew
    Kudara, Yukio
    De Souza, Andre B.
    JOURNAL OF ORAL IMPLANTOLOGY, 2022, 48 (05) : 351 - 357
  • [47] Comparison of the accuracy of implant position for two-implants supported fixed dental prosthesis using static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: A randomized controlled clinical trial
    Yimarj, Paweena
    Subbalekha, Keskanya
    Dhanesuan, Kanit
    Siriwatana, Kiti
    Mattheos, Nikos
    Pimkhaokham, Atiphan
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2020, 22 (06) : 672 - 678
  • [48] Evaluation of the Accuracy, Surgical Time, and Learning Curve of Freehand, Static, and Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery in an In Vitro Study
    Werny, Joscha Gabriel
    Fan, Shengchi
    Diaz, Leonardo
    Al-Nawas, Bilal
    Sagheb, Keyvan
    Gielisch, Matthias
    Schiegnitz, Eik
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2025,
  • [49] Clinical study of dynamic real-time navigation assisted immediate implant without flapping in the esthetic zone
    Geng, Ningbo
    Ren, Jing
    Zhou, Tianren
    Xia, Yixin
    Chen, Songling
    JOURNAL OF STOMATOLOGY ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2023, 124 (01)
  • [50] Whole-Process Digitalization-Assisted Immediate Implant Placement and Immediate Restoration in the Aesthetic Zone: A Prospective Study
    Han, Xiaomei
    Qi, Change
    Guo, Pengnv
    Zhang, Shuying
    Xu, Yali
    Lv, Guanghui
    Li, Ying
    Li, Changyi
    MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR, 2021, 27