Augmented reality for dental implant surgery: enhanced ICP

Shrestha, Laghumee; Alsadoon, Abeer; Prasad, P. W. C.; AlSallami, Nada; Haddad, Sami

doi:10.1007/s11227-020-03322-x

Cited by 11 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, the challenge still exists in dynamic navigation minimally invasive flapless ZI surgery, a conservative incision is recommended currently (Ramezanzade et al, 2021 ). A frequent view shift between computer screen and surgical field is needed, which may interpret essential cues and feedback obtaining and causes surgeon's fatigue (Shrestha et al, 2021 ). It has been evaluated that the learning curve of the navigation system in conventional dental implant surgery showed a learning plateau after 5 attempts in a phantom study (Sun et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and accuracy of dynamic navigation for zygomatic implant placement

Tao

Lan

et al. 2022

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To assess the accuracy of a real‐time dynamic navigation system applied in zygomatic implant (ZI) surgery and summarize device‐related negative events and their management. Material and methods Patients who presented with severely maxillary atrophy or maxillary defects and received dynamic navigation‐supported ZI surgery were included. The deviations of entry, exit, and angle were measured after image data fusion. A linear mixed‐effects model was used. Statistical significance was defined as p < .05. Device‐related negative events and their management were also recorded and analyzed. Results Two hundred and thirty‐one zygomatic implants (ZIs) with navigation‐guided placement were planned in 74 consecutive patients between Jan 2015 and Aug 2020. Among them, 71 patients with 221 ZIs received navigation‐guided surgery finally. The deviations in entry, exit, and angle were 1.57 ± 0.71 mm, 2.1 ± 0.94 mm and 2.68 ± 1.25 degrees, respectively. Significant differences were found in entry and exit deviation according to the number of ZIs in the zygomata (p = .03 and .00, respectively). Patients with atrophic maxillary or maxillary defects showed a significant difference in exit deviation (p = .01). A total of 28 device‐related negative events occurred, and one resulted in 2 ZI failures due to implant malposition. The overall survival rate of ZIs was 98.64%, and the mean follow‐up time was 24.11 months (Standard Deviation [SD]: 12.62). Conclusions The navigation‐supported ZI implantation is an accurate and reliable surgical approach. However, relevant technical negative events in the navigation process are worthy of attention.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and accuracy of dynamic navigation for zygomatic implant placement

Tao

Lan

et al. 2022

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The characteristics of the included studies are summarized in Multimedia Appendix 1 [20][21][22][23][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47]]. Among the 15 eligible studies, 5 studies [22,23,37,38] involved volunteers or patients, 2 studies were performed on cadavers [39][40][41], 5 studies [20,[42][43][44][45] involved plastic models, and 3 studies [21,46,47] used actual patient casts. Regarding the type of edentulous jaw, the number of mandibles (98/157, 62.4%) was higher than that of maxillary jaws (59/157, 37.6%), and the amount of partial edentulism (9/14, 64%) was higher than that of complete edentulism (5/14, 36%).…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the type of edentulous jaw, the number of mandibles (98/157, 62.4%) was higher than that of maxillary jaws (59/157, 37.6%), and the amount of partial edentulism (9/14, 64%) was higher than that of complete edentulism (5/14, 36%). The number and type of edentulism were not reported in a previous study [23]. Regarding implant placements, 7 studies involved [22,[37][38][39][40][41]45] dental implants, 2 studies [21,47] used pins, and 4 studies [42][43][44]46] exploited drill channels to measure implant positional deviations.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, augmented reality (AR)-an innovative image technology that produces an immersive surgical context by merging digital data with the real environment-has been incorporated into a dynamic dental implant-guiding system to help operators directly visualize digital navigation information over the actual operating field of view to improve real-time surgical performance [21][22][23]. AR technology has been increasingly used in the medical and dental fields owing to the rapid developments in image recognition and tracking technology [24][25][26][27][28][29][30].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Accuracy of Augmented Reality–Assisted Navigation in Dental Implant Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Mai¹,

Dam²,

Lee³

2023

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The novel concept of immersive 3D augmented reality (AR) surgical navigation has recently been introduced in the medical field. This method allows surgeons to directly focus on the surgical objective without having to look at a separate monitor. In the dental field, the recently developed AR-assisted dental implant navigation system (AR navigation), which uses innovative image technology to directly visualize and track a presurgical plan over an actual surgical site, has attracted great interest. Objective This study is the first systematic review and meta-analysis study that aimed to assess the accuracy of dental implants placed by AR navigation and compare it with that of the widely used implant placement methods, including the freehand method (FH), template-based static guidance (TG), and conventional navigation (CN). Methods Individual search strategies were used in PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar to search for articles published until March 21, 2022. This study was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database. Peer-reviewed journal articles evaluating the positional deviations of dental implants placed using AR-assisted implant navigation systems were included. Cohen d statistical power analysis was used to investigate the effect size estimate and CIs of standardized mean differences (SMDs) between data sets. Results Among the 425 articles retrieved, 15 articles were considered eligible for narrative review, 8 articles were considered for single-arm meta-analysis, and 4 were included in a 2-arm meta-analysis. The mean lateral, global, depth, and angular deviations of the dental implant placed using AR navigation were 0.90 (95% CI 0.78-1.02) mm, 1.18 (95% CI 0.95-1.41) mm, 0.78 (95% CI 0.48-1.08) mm, and 3.96° (95% CI 3.45°-4.48°), respectively. The accuracy of AR navigation was significantly higher than that of the FH method (SMD=−1.01; 95% CI −1.47 to −0.55; P<.001) and CN method (SMD=−0.46; 95% CI −0.64 to −0.29; P<.001). However, the accuracies of the AR navigation and TG methods were similar (SMD=0.06; 95% CI −0.62 to 0.74; P=.73). Conclusions The positional deviations of AR-navigated implant placements were within the safety zone, suggesting clinically acceptable accuracy of the AR navigation method. Moreover, the accuracy of AR implant navigation was comparable with that of the highly recommended dental implant–guided surgery method, TG, and superior to that of the conventional FH and CN methods. This review highlights the possibility of using AR navigation as an effective and accurate immersive surgical guide for dental implant placement.

show abstract

Application of an effective marker‐less augmented reality image guidance method in dental implant surgery

Dong,

Du,

et al. 2023

Robotics Computer Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The existing augmented reality (AR) dental implant surgery navigation system usually uses markers to complete image guidance. However, markers often affect dentists' operations and make patients uncomfortable. Methods:To solve the problems caused by markers, this paper proposes an effective marker-less image guidance method. After initialisation is completed by contour matching, the corresponding relationship is obtained by matching the feature points between the current frame and the preloaded initial frame. The camera pose is estimated by solving the Perspective-n-Point problem. Results:The registration error of AR images is 0.731 � 0.144 mm. The planting errors are 1.174 � 0.241 mm at the neck, 1.433 � 0.389 mm at the apex and 5.566 � 2.102°for the angle. The maximum error and standard deviation meet the clinical requirements. Conclusions:We demonstrate that the proposed method can accurately guide dentists to perform dental implant surgery.

show abstract

Augmented reality for dental implant surgery: enhanced ICP

Cited by 11 publications

References 34 publications

Reliability and accuracy of dynamic navigation for zygomatic implant placement

Reliability and accuracy of dynamic navigation for zygomatic implant placement

Accuracy of Augmented Reality–Assisted Navigation in Dental Implant Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Application of an effective marker‐less augmented reality image guidance method in dental implant surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About