静态与动态计算机辅助种植系统在上颌美观区即刻种植的准确性比较:一项前瞻性研究。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Yuzhang Feng, Zhenya Su, Anchun Mo, Xingmei Yang
{"title":"静态与动态计算机辅助种植系统在上颌美观区即刻种植的准确性比较:一项前瞻性研究。","authors":"Yuzhang Feng,&nbsp;Zhenya Su,&nbsp;Anchun Mo,&nbsp;Xingmei Yang","doi":"10.1186/s40729-022-00464-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrated that clinically acceptable accuracy of immediate implant placement could be achieved using static and dynamic CAIS systems. Trial registration ChiCTR, ChiCTR2200056321. Registered 3 February 2022, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=151348.</p>","PeriodicalId":14076,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Implant Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9747989/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"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.\",\"authors\":\"Yuzhang Feng,&nbsp;Zhenya Su,&nbsp;Anchun Mo,&nbsp;Xingmei Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40729-022-00464-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrated that clinically acceptable accuracy of immediate implant placement could be achieved using static and dynamic CAIS systems. Trial registration ChiCTR, ChiCTR2200056321. Registered 3 February 2022, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=151348.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14076,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Implant Dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9747989/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Implant Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00464-w\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Implant Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00464-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

目的:本研究旨在比较完全引导的动态和静态计算机辅助种植体手术(CAIS)系统在美学区即刻种植体放置的准确性。方法:将40例符合条件的患者随机平均分为静态CAIS组(n = 20)和动态CAIS组(n = 20)。测量种植体入口、尖端的整体偏差以及放置和计划种植体位置之间的角度偏差,并将其作为主要结果进行比较。次要结果是种植体在中-远端、唇-腭和冠-根尖方向放置的偏差。结果:在即刻种植时,CAIS静态组和动态组的平均总入口偏差分别为0.99±0.63 mm和1.06±0.55 mm (p = 0.659),平均总尖偏差分别为1.50±0.75 mm和1.18±0.53 mm (p = 0.231)。静态CAIS组与动态CAIS组的角度偏差分别为3.07±2.18°和3.23±1.67°(p = 0.547)。静态和动态CAIS系统即刻种植体放置的精度参数无显著差异,除了动态CAIS组种植体在入牙时唇腭方向的偏差明显大于静态CAIS组(p = 0.005)。结论:本研究表明,使用静态和动态CAIS系统可以实现临床可接受的即刻种植体放置准确性。试验注册ChiCTR, ChiCTR2200056321。2022年2月3日注册,http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=151348。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. Trial registration ChiCTR, ChiCTR2200056321. Registered 3 February 2022, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=151348.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Implant Dentistry
International Journal of Implant Dentistry DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
7.40%
发文量
53
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Implant Dentistry is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the SpringerOpen brand. The journal is dedicated to promoting the exchange and discussion of all research areas relevant to implant dentistry in the form of systematic literature or invited reviews, prospective and retrospective clinical studies, clinical case reports, basic laboratory and animal research, and articles on material research and engineering.
×
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