Cargando…

Influence of experience on dental implant placement: an in vitro comparison of freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the performance of novice versus experienced practitioners for placing dental implant using freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches. METHODS: A total of 72 implants were placed in 36 simulation models. Three experienced and three novice prac...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Xiaotong, Shaheen, Eman, Shujaat, Sohaib, Meeus, Jan, Legrand, Paul, Lahoud, Pierre, do Nascimento Gerhardt, Maurício, Politis, Constantinus, Jacobs, Reinhilde
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9548458/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36210395
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00441-3
_version_ 1784805439736643584
author Wang, Xiaotong
Shaheen, Eman
Shujaat, Sohaib
Meeus, Jan
Legrand, Paul
Lahoud, Pierre
do Nascimento Gerhardt, Maurício
Politis, Constantinus
Jacobs, Reinhilde
author_facet Wang, Xiaotong
Shaheen, Eman
Shujaat, Sohaib
Meeus, Jan
Legrand, Paul
Lahoud, Pierre
do Nascimento Gerhardt, Maurício
Politis, Constantinus
Jacobs, Reinhilde
author_sort Wang, Xiaotong
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the performance of novice versus experienced practitioners for placing dental implant using freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches. METHODS: A total of 72 implants were placed in 36 simulation models. Three experienced and three novice practitioners were recruited for performing the osteotomy and implant insertion with freehand, surgical guide (pilot-drill guidance) and navigation (X-Guide, X-Nav technologies) approaches. Each practitioner inserted 4 implants per approach randomly with a 1-week gap to avoid memory bias (4 insertion sites × 3 approaches × 6 practitioners = 72 implants). The performance of practitioners was assessed by comparing actual implant deviation to the planned position, time required for implant placement and questionnaire-based self-confidence evaluation of practitioners on a scale of 1–30. RESULTS: The navigation approach significantly improved angular deviation compared with freehand (P < 0.001) and surgical guide (P < 0.001) irrespective of the experience. Surgical time with navigation was significantly longer compared to the freehand approach (P < 0.001), where experienced practitioners performed significantly faster compared to novice practitioners (P < 0.001). Overall, self-confidence was higher in favor of novice practitioners with both guided approaches. In addition, the confidence of novice practitioners (median score = 26) was comparable to that of experienced practitioners (median score = 27) for placing implants with the navigation approach. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic navigation system could act as a viable tool for dental implant placement. Unlike freehand and static-guided approaches, novice practitioners showed comparable accuracy and self-confidence to that of experienced practitioners with the navigation approach. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40729-022-00441-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9548458
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95484582022-10-11 Influence of experience on dental implant placement: an in vitro comparison of freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches Wang, Xiaotong Shaheen, Eman Shujaat, Sohaib Meeus, Jan Legrand, Paul Lahoud, Pierre do Nascimento Gerhardt, Maurício Politis, Constantinus Jacobs, Reinhilde Int J Implant Dent Research PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the performance of novice versus experienced practitioners for placing dental implant using freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches. METHODS: A total of 72 implants were placed in 36 simulation models. Three experienced and three novice practitioners were recruited for performing the osteotomy and implant insertion with freehand, surgical guide (pilot-drill guidance) and navigation (X-Guide, X-Nav technologies) approaches. Each practitioner inserted 4 implants per approach randomly with a 1-week gap to avoid memory bias (4 insertion sites × 3 approaches × 6 practitioners = 72 implants). The performance of practitioners was assessed by comparing actual implant deviation to the planned position, time required for implant placement and questionnaire-based self-confidence evaluation of practitioners on a scale of 1–30. RESULTS: The navigation approach significantly improved angular deviation compared with freehand (P < 0.001) and surgical guide (P < 0.001) irrespective of the experience. Surgical time with navigation was significantly longer compared to the freehand approach (P < 0.001), where experienced practitioners performed significantly faster compared to novice practitioners (P < 0.001). Overall, self-confidence was higher in favor of novice practitioners with both guided approaches. In addition, the confidence of novice practitioners (median score = 26) was comparable to that of experienced practitioners (median score = 27) for placing implants with the navigation approach. CONCLUSIONS: Dynamic navigation system could act as a viable tool for dental implant placement. Unlike freehand and static-guided approaches, novice practitioners showed comparable accuracy and self-confidence to that of experienced practitioners with the navigation approach. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40729-022-00441-3. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-10-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9548458/ /pubmed/36210395 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00441-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research
Wang, Xiaotong
Shaheen, Eman
Shujaat, Sohaib
Meeus, Jan
Legrand, Paul
Lahoud, Pierre
do Nascimento Gerhardt, Maurício
Politis, Constantinus
Jacobs, Reinhilde
Influence of experience on dental implant placement: an in vitro comparison of freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches
title Influence of experience on dental implant placement: an in vitro comparison of freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches
title_full Influence of experience on dental implant placement: an in vitro comparison of freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches
title_fullStr Influence of experience on dental implant placement: an in vitro comparison of freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches
title_full_unstemmed Influence of experience on dental implant placement: an in vitro comparison of freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches
title_short Influence of experience on dental implant placement: an in vitro comparison of freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches
title_sort influence of experience on dental implant placement: an in vitro comparison of freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9548458/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36210395
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00441-3
work_keys_str_mv AT wangxiaotong influenceofexperienceondentalimplantplacementaninvitrocomparisonoffreehandstaticguidedanddynamicnavigationapproaches
AT shaheeneman influenceofexperienceondentalimplantplacementaninvitrocomparisonoffreehandstaticguidedanddynamicnavigationapproaches
AT shujaatsohaib influenceofexperienceondentalimplantplacementaninvitrocomparisonoffreehandstaticguidedanddynamicnavigationapproaches
AT meeusjan influenceofexperienceondentalimplantplacementaninvitrocomparisonoffreehandstaticguidedanddynamicnavigationapproaches
AT legrandpaul influenceofexperienceondentalimplantplacementaninvitrocomparisonoffreehandstaticguidedanddynamicnavigationapproaches
AT lahoudpierre influenceofexperienceondentalimplantplacementaninvitrocomparisonoffreehandstaticguidedanddynamicnavigationapproaches
AT donascimentogerhardtmauricio influenceofexperienceondentalimplantplacementaninvitrocomparisonoffreehandstaticguidedanddynamicnavigationapproaches
AT politisconstantinus influenceofexperienceondentalimplantplacementaninvitrocomparisonoffreehandstaticguidedanddynamicnavigationapproaches
AT jacobsreinhilde influenceofexperienceondentalimplantplacementaninvitrocomparisonoffreehandstaticguidedanddynamicnavigationapproaches