Minimally Invasive Navigation-Guided Quad Zygomatic Implant Placement: A Comparative In Vitro Study.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Shengchi Fan, Matthias W Gielisch, Leonardo Díaz, Daniel G E Thiem, Bilal Al-Nawas, Peer W Kämmerer
{"title":"Minimally Invasive Navigation-Guided Quad Zygomatic Implant Placement: A Comparative In Vitro Study.","authors":"Shengchi Fan,&nbsp;Matthias W Gielisch,&nbsp;Leonardo Díaz,&nbsp;Daniel G E Thiem,&nbsp;Bilal Al-Nawas,&nbsp;Peer W Kämmerer","doi":"10.11607/jomi.10043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> Zygomatic implants (ZIs) have been considered a reliable alternative treatment for patients with maxillary atrophy and/or maxillary defects. The use of a navigation system for assisting ZI placement could be a reliable approach for enhancing accuracy and safety. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of a new dynamic surgical navigation system with its minimally invasive registration guide for quad zygomatic implant placement in comparison with a gold standard navigation approach. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> A total of 40 zygomatic implants were placed in 10 3D-printed models based on the CBCT scans of edentulous patients. For registration, a surgical registration guide with a quick response plate was used for the test group, and five hemispheric cavities as registered miniscrews in the intraoral area were used for the control group. In each model, a split-mouth approach was employed (two ZIs in bilateral zygomata) to test both systems. After ZI placement, a CBCT scan was performed and merged with pre-interventional planning. The deviations between planned and placed implants were calculated as offset basis, offset apical, and angular deviation and compared between the systems. <b>Results:</b> The offset basis, offset apical, and angular deviation were 1.43 ± 0.55 mm, 1.81 ± 0.68 mm, and 2.32 ± 1.59 degrees in the test group, respectively. For the control group, values of 1.48 ± 0.57 mm, 1.76 ± 0.62 mm, and 2.57 ± 1.51 degrees were measured without significant differences between groups (all <i>P</i> < .05). The accuracy of ZI positions (anterior and posterior) were measured without significant differences between groups. <b>Conclusion:</b> Two navigation systems with different registration techniques seem to achieve comparable acceptable accuracy for dynamic navigation of zygomatic implant placement. With the test group system, additional pre-interventional radiologic imaging and invasive fiducial marker insertion could be avoided.</p>","PeriodicalId":50298,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants","volume":"38 2","pages":"367-373"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.10043","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose: Zygomatic implants (ZIs) have been considered a reliable alternative treatment for patients with maxillary atrophy and/or maxillary defects. The use of a navigation system for assisting ZI placement could be a reliable approach for enhancing accuracy and safety. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of a new dynamic surgical navigation system with its minimally invasive registration guide for quad zygomatic implant placement in comparison with a gold standard navigation approach. Materials and Methods: A total of 40 zygomatic implants were placed in 10 3D-printed models based on the CBCT scans of edentulous patients. For registration, a surgical registration guide with a quick response plate was used for the test group, and five hemispheric cavities as registered miniscrews in the intraoral area were used for the control group. In each model, a split-mouth approach was employed (two ZIs in bilateral zygomata) to test both systems. After ZI placement, a CBCT scan was performed and merged with pre-interventional planning. The deviations between planned and placed implants were calculated as offset basis, offset apical, and angular deviation and compared between the systems. Results: The offset basis, offset apical, and angular deviation were 1.43 ± 0.55 mm, 1.81 ± 0.68 mm, and 2.32 ± 1.59 degrees in the test group, respectively. For the control group, values of 1.48 ± 0.57 mm, 1.76 ± 0.62 mm, and 2.57 ± 1.51 degrees were measured without significant differences between groups (all P < .05). The accuracy of ZI positions (anterior and posterior) were measured without significant differences between groups. Conclusion: Two navigation systems with different registration techniques seem to achieve comparable acceptable accuracy for dynamic navigation of zygomatic implant placement. With the test group system, additional pre-interventional radiologic imaging and invasive fiducial marker insertion could be avoided.

微创导航引导四头颧植入:一项体外比较研究。
目的:颧骨种植体(ZIs)被认为是上颌萎缩和/或上颌缺损患者可靠的替代治疗方法。使用导航系统协助ZI放置可能是提高准确性和安全性的可靠方法。这项体外研究的目的是评估一种新的动态手术导航系统及其微创定位指南在四颧植入物放置中的准确性,并与金标准导航入路进行比较。材料与方法:根据无牙患者的CBCT扫描结果,在10个3d打印模型中放置40个颧种植体。实验组使用带快速反应板的手术配位指南,对照组使用5个半球形腔作为口内区注册的微型螺钉。在每个模型中,采用裂口法(双侧颧骨两个ZIs)来测试两个系统。ZI放置后,进行CBCT扫描并合并介入前计划。计划种植体和放置种植体之间的偏差被计算为偏移基础、偏移根尖和角度偏差,并在系统之间进行比较。结果:试验组偏基底、偏根尖、偏角分别为1.43±0.55 mm、1.81±0.68 mm、2.32±1.59°。对照组为1.48±0.57 mm、1.76±0.62 mm、2.57±1.51度,组间差异无统计学意义(均P < 0.05)。测量ZI位置(前后)的准确性,组间无显著差异。结论:两种不同配准技术的导航系统似乎可以达到可接受的颧植入动态导航精度。使用试验组系统,可以避免额外的介入前放射成像和侵入性基准标记物的插入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Edited by Steven E. Eckert, DDS, MS ISSN (Print): 0882-2786 ISSN (Online): 1942-4434 This highly regarded, often-cited journal integrates clinical and scientific data to improve methods and results of oral and maxillofacial implant therapy. It presents pioneering research, technology, clinical applications, reviews of the literature, seminal studies, emerging technology, position papers, and consensus studies, as well as the many clinical and therapeutic innovations that ensue as a result of these efforts. The editorial board is composed of recognized opinion leaders in their respective areas of expertise and reflects the international reach of the journal. Under their leadership, JOMI maintains its strong scientific integrity while expanding its influence within the field of implant dentistry. JOMI’s popular regular feature "Thematic Abstract Review" presents a review of abstracts of recently published articles on a specific topical area of interest each issue.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信