Cargando…
Accuracy of Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation Compared to Computer-Aided Static Navigation for Dental Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study
Aim: To analyze the accuracy capability of two computer-aided navigation procedures for dental implant placement. Materials and Methods: A total of 40 dental implants were selected, which were randomly distributed into two study groups, namely, group A, consisting of those implants that were placed...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6947513/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31810351 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm8122123 |
_version_ | 1783485568701693952 |
---|---|
author | Mediavilla Guzmán, Alfonso Riad Deglow, Elena Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro Agustín-Panadero, Rubén Hernández Montero, Sofía |
author_facet | Mediavilla Guzmán, Alfonso Riad Deglow, Elena Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro Agustín-Panadero, Rubén Hernández Montero, Sofía |
author_sort | Mediavilla Guzmán, Alfonso |
collection | PubMed |
description | Aim: To analyze the accuracy capability of two computer-aided navigation procedures for dental implant placement. Materials and Methods: A total of 40 dental implants were selected, which were randomly distributed into two study groups, namely, group A, consisting of those implants that were placed using a computer-aided static navigation system (n = 20) (guided implant (GI)) and group B, consisting of those implants that were placed using a computer-aided dynamic navigation system (n = 20) (navigation implant (NI)). The placement of the implants from group A was performed using surgical templates that were designed using 3D implant-planning software based on preoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and a 3D extraoral surface scan, and the placement of group B implants was planned and performed using the dynamic navigation system. After placing the dental implants, a second CBCT was performed and the degree of accuracy of the planning and placement of the implants was analyzed using therapeutic planning software and Student’s t-test. Results: The paired t-test revealed no statistically significant differences between GI and NI at the coronal (p = 0.6535) and apical (p = 0.9081) levels; however, statistically significant differences were observed between the angular deviations of GI and NI (p = 0.0272). Conclusion: Both computer-aided static and dynamic navigation procedures allow accurate implant placement. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6947513 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69475132020-01-13 Accuracy of Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation Compared to Computer-Aided Static Navigation for Dental Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study Mediavilla Guzmán, Alfonso Riad Deglow, Elena Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro Agustín-Panadero, Rubén Hernández Montero, Sofía J Clin Med Article Aim: To analyze the accuracy capability of two computer-aided navigation procedures for dental implant placement. Materials and Methods: A total of 40 dental implants were selected, which were randomly distributed into two study groups, namely, group A, consisting of those implants that were placed using a computer-aided static navigation system (n = 20) (guided implant (GI)) and group B, consisting of those implants that were placed using a computer-aided dynamic navigation system (n = 20) (navigation implant (NI)). The placement of the implants from group A was performed using surgical templates that were designed using 3D implant-planning software based on preoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and a 3D extraoral surface scan, and the placement of group B implants was planned and performed using the dynamic navigation system. After placing the dental implants, a second CBCT was performed and the degree of accuracy of the planning and placement of the implants was analyzed using therapeutic planning software and Student’s t-test. Results: The paired t-test revealed no statistically significant differences between GI and NI at the coronal (p = 0.6535) and apical (p = 0.9081) levels; however, statistically significant differences were observed between the angular deviations of GI and NI (p = 0.0272). Conclusion: Both computer-aided static and dynamic navigation procedures allow accurate implant placement. MDPI 2019-12-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6947513/ /pubmed/31810351 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm8122123 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Mediavilla Guzmán, Alfonso Riad Deglow, Elena Zubizarreta-Macho, Álvaro Agustín-Panadero, Rubén Hernández Montero, Sofía Accuracy of Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation Compared to Computer-Aided Static Navigation for Dental Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study |
title | Accuracy of Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation Compared to Computer-Aided Static Navigation for Dental Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study |
title_full | Accuracy of Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation Compared to Computer-Aided Static Navigation for Dental Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study |
title_fullStr | Accuracy of Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation Compared to Computer-Aided Static Navigation for Dental Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Accuracy of Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation Compared to Computer-Aided Static Navigation for Dental Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study |
title_short | Accuracy of Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation Compared to Computer-Aided Static Navigation for Dental Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study |
title_sort | accuracy of computer-aided dynamic navigation compared to computer-aided static navigation for dental implant placement: an in vitro study |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6947513/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31810351 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm8122123 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mediavillaguzmanalfonso accuracyofcomputeraideddynamicnavigationcomparedtocomputeraidedstaticnavigationfordentalimplantplacementaninvitrostudy AT riaddeglowelena accuracyofcomputeraideddynamicnavigationcomparedtocomputeraidedstaticnavigationfordentalimplantplacementaninvitrostudy AT zubizarretamachoalvaro accuracyofcomputeraideddynamicnavigationcomparedtocomputeraidedstaticnavigationfordentalimplantplacementaninvitrostudy AT agustinpanaderoruben accuracyofcomputeraideddynamicnavigationcomparedtocomputeraidedstaticnavigationfordentalimplantplacementaninvitrostudy AT hernandezmonterosofia accuracyofcomputeraideddynamicnavigationcomparedtocomputeraidedstaticnavigationfordentalimplantplacementaninvitrostudy |