Accuracy of computer-guided implant placement in anterior regions

Fang, Yiqin; An, Xueyin; Jeong, Seung Mi; Choi, Byung Ho

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.07.015

Cited by 31 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Implants in the frontal region of the mandible had the highest accuracy, followed by those of the posterior region of the mandible, whereas those of the posterior region of the maxilla had the lowest accuracy. Fang et al [30] noted that because people can only open their mouths to a certain extent and have buccal soft tissue, surgery using a dental implant device can be performed in limited spaces, resulting in results of posterior teeth surgery being inferior to those of anterior teeth surgery. Tallarico et al [26] observed that anterior implants had higher accuracy than posterior ones based on all deviation errors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Accuracy of Implant Installation with a Navigation System (NS), a Laboratory Guide (LG), NS with LG, and Freehand Drilling

Sun

Lee

Lan

2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of implant placement by using the conventional freehand method, the surgical guide alone, the dental navigation system alone, and the dental navigation system with a surgical guide. The participants were aged 20 years or older and were requiring dental implant surgery according to an assessment made by a dentist between July 2014 and December 2017. A total of 128 dental implants were inserted, 32 dental implants in each group, and participants with similar or identical age (i.e., 20–50 years or 50 years or above) and missing tooth locations were paired for comparison. Accuracy was measured by overlaying the real position in the postoperative Cone Beam Computerized Tomography (CBCT) on the virtual presurgical placement of the implant in a CBCT image. Using the dental navigation system with a surgical guide could help dentists to position implants more accurately. Total, longitudinal, and angular error deviation were significantly different (p < 0.0001). The same level of accuracy could be obtained for the different jaws and tooth positions. The one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that the total, longitudinal, and angular errors differed significantly (p < 0.0001). A comparison of the four dental implant surgical methods indicated that the combination of a dental implant navigation system and a surgical guide kit achieved the highest accuracy in terms of the different tooth positions and jaws.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Accuracy of Implant Installation with a Navigation System (NS), a Laboratory Guide (LG), NS with LG, and Freehand Drilling

Sun

Lee

Lan

2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Computer-guided implant placement in anterior regions can be done with CBCT [34]. It should be noted that flapless immediate implant placement resulted in superior accuracy when compared with freehand surgery in transferring the implant position in the anterior maxilla using preoperative CBCT [35,36].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It should be noted that flapless immediate implant placement resulted in superior accuracy when compared with freehand surgery in transferring the implant position in the anterior maxilla using preoperative CBCT [35,36]. The average linear deviation was 0.46 mm for the implant shoulder, and the deviation was 0.67 mm for the implant apex, with an average angular deviation of 1.40 degrees [34]. The final implant position was shifted toward the labial direction when compared with the initial planning [35].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Alveolar Bone Morphology of the Maxillary Central and Lateral Incisors with Normal Occlusion

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objectives: This study investigated the morphology of the labial and palatal bony wall of the maxillary central and lateral incisors using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). The difference between males and females and the measurement between right and left sides were measured. Materials and Methods: Twenty participants, consisting of 11 females and 9 males having normal occlusion, were used for the analysis. The mean age was 21.9 ± 3.0 years. The thickness of the labial bony wall and palatal bony wall, perpendicular to the long axis of the root, were evaluated at 3 and 5 mm apical from the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) and at the root apex. The available bony wall below the apex of the central and lateral incisors, and the angulation between the long axis of the tested tooth and outer surface of the labial bone were measured. Results: The mean labial bony wall thickness at the 3 and 5 mm apical from the CEJ were 1.1 ± 0.3 mm and 1.0 ± 0.4 mm for central incisors, respectively, as well as 1.2 ± 0.4 mm and 1.0 ± 0.4 mm for lateral incisors, respectively. The mean palatal bony wall thickness at 5 mm from the CEJ was above 2 mm in the central and lateral incisors. The percentage of labial bony wall thickness 2 mm or greater at the root apex in central incisors was higher than in lateral incisors (62.5% vs. 55.0%). The percentage of palatal bony wall thickness ≥2 mm at 3 mm apical from the CEJ in the central incisors was higher than in the lateral incisors (37.5% vs. 15.0%). The results on the left and right sides did not show statistically significant differences, except in the labial and palatal bony wall thickness at 3 mm from the CEJ in the lateral incisor. Generally, no significant differences were seen between males and females, but males had a significantly higher labial bony wall thickness at 3 and 5 mm from the CEJ in the central and lateral incisors when compared with females. Conclusions: This study showed that a majority of the cases of Korean participants had less than 2 mm of labial bony wall thickness at 3 and 5 mm apical from the CEJ at central and lateral incisors, and this should be kept in mind while performing dental practices, including tooth extraction or immediate implantation in anterior regions. Preoperative analysis using CBCT may be beneficial for establishing the treatment plan.

show abstract

“…In particular, in the case of using a highly accurate digital guided surgery system, it helps to place the implant in a safely planned position without opening the flap especially at the anterior site with a narrow bone width [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digitally guided surgery and prosthesis with narrow implants in the anterior region

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this case report is to introduce a flapless method of securely placing a narrow implant on the upper and lower anterior teeth missing area with narrow bone width using a digitally guided surgery system and to introduce a process of prosthesis manufacturing using an oral scanner without a working model. The narrow implants in this case report remained stable for a certain period of time (12, 24, and 36 months after surgery) without loss of the surrounding bones.

show abstract

Accuracy of computer-guided implant placement in anterior regions

Cited by 31 publications

References 20 publications

Comparing Accuracy of Implant Installation with a Navigation System (NS), a Laboratory Guide (LG), NS with LG, and Freehand Drilling

Comparing Accuracy of Implant Installation with a Navigation System (NS), a Laboratory Guide (LG), NS with LG, and Freehand Drilling

Analysis of Alveolar Bone Morphology of the Maxillary Central and Lateral Incisors with Normal Occlusion

Digitally guided surgery and prosthesis with narrow implants in the anterior region

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About