Feedback on dental implants with dynamic navigation versus freehand

Aim The study aims to compare the accuracy of dynamic navigation (DN) and static guides (SGs) for simultaneous adjacent parallel placement of implants, the time taken for the surgery, and the ease of handling the instruments. Materials and methods This prospective trial was carried out at the Department of Implantology of Saveetha Dental College from October 2022 to February 2023. A total of 20 patients who needed simultaneous adjacent dental implants were allocated randomly into two groups: Group 1 SG surgery and Group 2 DN surgery. Forty implants were placed, 20 under DN and 20 under SG. Bucco-lingual displacement, apico-coronal displacement, mesiodistal displacement, and mesiodistal angulation were compared between the two groups. The patients’ data in both groups were evaluated by operating surgeons along with the surgical time taken and the ease of handling of instruments. Results The 20 patients who underwent implant placement in the DN and SG groups all had adjacent missing teeth in posterior sites, including lower posteriors (70%) and upper posteriors (30%). There was improved precision in relation to the mesiodistal displacement and angulation of the anterior implant of the adjacent parallel implants. The mesiodistal displacement in Group 1 (SG) was 5.61 + 3.1 mm, which was higher than Group 2 (DN), which was 0.55 + 0.56 mm. The mesiodistal angulation was 3.1 + 2.9 degrees in Group 2 and 0.42 + 0.5 degrees in Group 1. The second implant had a significant difference (p < 0.005) in mesiodistal displacement, mesiodistal angulation, and bucco-lingual displacement. The difference between the intergroup surgical time (mean + SD) in Group 1 was 30 + 4.5 mins and in Group 2 was 60.7 + 10.1 mins, with p < 0.05 statistically significant. The comfort of the operator was better in the SG group. Conclusion Any digitally aided implant placement technique can improve placement accuracy but each has its downfalls. Achieving the highest levels of precision and long-lasting prosthetic results hinges on both the suitability of the chosen case and the expertise of the surgeon performing the implant placement.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Evaluation of Accuracy of Adjacent Parallel Implant Placements Between Dynamic Navigation and Static Guide: A Prospective Study

Parekar,

Selvaganesh,

Nesappan

2024

“…Dynamic navigation can also help in educating the patient, as the patient will be made comfortable and transparency can be maintained throughout the procedure, which can reduce the overall anxiety of the patient [ 13 ]. For improved accuracy, dynamic navigation can also be coupled with static navigation systems, which can yield effective results [ 14 - 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic Navigation Protocol for Direct Sinus Lift and Simultaneous Implant Placement: A Case Report

Dotia,

Selvaganesh,

R. P.

et al. 2024

Aim: This study aims to evaluate the accuracy associated with the use of a dynamic navigation system for the lateral window opening for a direct sinus floor elevation (SFE) procedure with simultaneous implant placement. Materials and methods: A female patient, aged 27 years, reported to the Department of Implantology seeking treatment for her lost tooth. On radiographic examination, the residual alveolar ridge height was 6 mm in the 26 (left upper first molar) region. For the implant placement, the case was planned to be carried out under dynamic navigation (Navident, Claronav, Canada). To make the lateral window accessible to the sinus floor, an implant trajectory resembling the required window dimensions and prosthetic implant position was planned. Post-surgery cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was taken to assess the accuracy of the lateral window and implant trajectories using Evalunav (Navident, Claronav, Canada) analysis with dynamic navigation software. Results: There was improved accuracy of the lateral window opening, and the visualization of the lateral window was maintained in real-time throughout the procedure, which was advantageous to eliminate the tearing of the thin sinus membrane. The deviations found in the trajectory of the lateral window in comparison between the planning and post-procedure were: (a) entry was deviated by 2.83 mm; (b) the apex was deviated by 2.52 mm; (c) vertically, the apex was deviated by 0.29 mm; and (d) there was an 8.93° deviation in the angulation of the trajectory. The implant that was placed simultaneously with the SFE’s accuracy was in comparison with the position that was planned: (a) entry was deviated by 0.03 mm, (b) the apex was deviated by 0.82 mm, (c) vertically, the apex was deviated by 0.82 mm, and (d) there was a 0° deviation in the angulation of the trajectory. Conclusion: Dynamic navigation technology can help overcome complications associated with direct sinus lift procedures by providing highly accurate and precise planning and execution of the surgical procedure. This can lead to improved implant stability and a reduced risk of complications.

“…One of the main advantages of DN is its ability to improve surgical accuracy, precision, and patient and operator comfort [9]. The real-time imaging and feedback provided by the system can help surgeons avoid critical structures and ensure that the surgical instruments and implants are placed in the correct position [4,5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Navigation Technique for Improved Precision in Implantology

Chhabra,

Selvaganesh,

Nesappan

2023

The hybrid navigation technique involves the merging of the Dynamic navigation (DN) system (Navident, Claronav, Canada) and static navigation technique (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). Combining the advantages of both techniques, devising a protocol of hybrid navigation will be advantageous to eliminate the difficulties faced by operators in using either methods separately. Three patients requiring dental implants were included in this study. This requires the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) data) and intra-oral scan (Standard Tessellation Language (STL) format) data for the accurate planning of the implant positions in both the static and dynamic approaches. The steps carried out were repeated for each of the patients, the accuracy of the implant placement was verified postoperatively by merging the CBCT data pre and post through the Evalunav software (NaviDent, Claronav). The accuracy of the implants placed were assessed based on the mesio-distal, bucco-lingual, apical deviations in distance and in angulation. The semi-robotic DN and static guide combination as a hybrid technique is an interesting method to improve the accuracy of flapless implant surgeries and can be used in cases where the anatomical landmarks are determinant factors for the implant placement.