Journal of Isfahan Dental School

Assessing the Initial Prediction by Navigation in the DIOnavi System on the Accuracy of Implant Placement

Document Type : مقاله‌های پژوهشی

Authors

1 Dentist, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz JundiShapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Ahvaz JundiShapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

4 Postgraduate Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Islamic Azad university, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: Accuracy in implant-guided surgery means that pre-determined position of the implant by the software matches the position of the implant in the patient's mouth. The aim of this study was to evaluating the effect of initial prediction by navigation in the DIOnavi system on the accuracy of implant placement
Materials and Methods: In this interventional study, two samples of 17 and 25 patients) in total 42 patient) requesting navigation method for implant placement were selected. First, a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was taken from each patient and then its virtual model was prepared using the DIO NAVI system (South Korean DIO company). After implant placement by the surgeon, two to three months later, the CBCT was taken again from the same section and the thickness of the buccal bone on the implant, the thickness of the lingual bone on the implant, the distance of the implant apex to the apical anatomic regions (Nasal cavity, Maxillary sinus and Mental foramen), Implant depth from crest edge, implant distance from adjacent teeth if present in the two obtained images were compared. Data were analyzed by Paired t-test and Pearson Correlation Coefficient (α = 0.05)
Results: The mean of all measurements in both groups in the initial prediction was significantly related to after surgery (r = 0.99, p value < 0.001) and in the group of 17, 98% and in the group of 25 97.4% of the variances of the means of the total measurements were explained by the initial prediction.
Conclusion: The accuracy of implant placement with the help of dionavi system is estimated to be more than 97%.
Key words: Dental implants, Surgical Navigation Systems, Oral surgery

1. Rinaldi M, Ganz SD, Mottola A. Computer-guided applications for dental implants, bone grafting, and reconstructive surgery. 1st ed. London, UK: Elsevier; 2015.
2. Westendorff C, Hoffmann J, Gomez-Roman G, Bartz D, Herberts T, Reinert S. Accuracy and interindividual outcome of navigation guided dental implant socket drilling in an experimental setting. International Congress Series 2005; 1281: 1205-10.
3. Block MS. Accuracy using static or dynamic navigation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2016; 74(1): 2-3.
4. Casap N, Tarazi E, Wexler A, Sonnenfeld U, Lustmann J. Intraoperative computerized navigation for flapless implant surgery and immediate loading in the edentulous mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005; 20(1): 92-8.
5. Kang SH, Lee JW, Lim SH, Kim YH, Kim MK. Verification of the usability of a navigation method in dental implant surgery: in vitro comparison with the stereolithographic surgical guide template method. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2014; 42(7): 1530-5.
6. Ewers R, Schicho K, Truppe M, Seemann R, Reichwein A, Figl M, et al. Computer-aided navigation in dental implantology: 7 years of clinical experience. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004; 62(3): 329-34.
7. Voulgarakis A, Strub JR, Att W. Outcomes of implants placed with three different flapless surgical procedures: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014; 43(4): 476-86.
8. Meyer U, Wiesmann HP, Runte C, Fillies T, Meier N, Lueth T, et al. Evaluation of accuracy of insertion of dental implants and prosthetic treatment by computer-aided navigation in minipigs. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003; 41(2): 102-8.
9. Tsuji M, Noguchi N, Shigematsu M, Yamashita Y, Ihara K, Shikimori M, et al. A new navigation system based on cephalograms and dental casts for oral and maxillofacial surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006; 35(9): 828-36.
10. Aydemir CA, Arısan V. Accuracy of dental implant placement via dynamic navigation or the freehand method: A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2020; 31(3): 255-63.
11. Schnitman PA, Rubenstein JE, Whörle PS, DaSilva JD, Koch GG. Implants for partial edentulism.
J Dent Educ 1988; 52(12): 725-36.
12. Vercruyssen M, Hultin M, Van Assche N, Svensson K, Naert I, Quirynen M. Guided surgery: accuracy and efficacy. Periodontol 2000 2014; 66(1): 228-46.
13. Vercruyssen M, Cox C, Coucke W, Naert I, Jacobs R, Quirynen M. A randomized clinical trial comparing guided implant surgery (bone- or mucosa-supported) with mental navigation or the use of a pilot-drill template. J ClinPeriodontol 2014; 41(7): 717-23.
14. Panchal N, Mahmood L, Retana A, Emery 3rd R. Dynamic navigation for dental implant surgery. Oral MaxillofacSurgClin North Am 2019; 31(4): 539-47.
15. Hardy TC, Suri L, Stark P. Influence of patient head positioning on measured axial tooth inclination in panoramic radiography. J Orthod 2009; 36(2): 103-10.
16. Gillot L, Cannas B, Friberg B, Vrielinck L, Rohner D, Pettersson A. Accuracy of virtually planned and conventionally placed implants in edentulous cadaver maxillae and mandibles: a preliminary report. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112(4): 798-804.
17. Behneke A, Burwinkel M, Behneke N. Factors influencing transfer accuracy of cone beam CT-derived template-based implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23(4): 416-23.
18. D'haese J, De Bruyn H. Effect of smoking habits on accuracy of implant placement using mucosally supported stereolithographic surgical guides. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013; 15(3): 402-11.
19. Stefanelli LV, DeGroot BS, Lipton DI, Mandelaris GA. Accuracy of a dynamic dental implant navigation system in a private practice. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2019; 34(1): 205-13.
20. Brief J, Edinger D, Hassfeld S, Eggers G. Accuracy of image-guided implantology. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005; 16(4) :495-501
21. Sun TM, Lan TH, Pan CY, Lee HE. Dental implant navigation system guide the surgery future. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2018; 34(1): 56-64.
22. Lund H, Gröndahl K, Gröndahl HG. Accuracy and precision of linear measurements in cone beam computed tomography Accuitomo tomograms obtained with different reconstruction techniques. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2009; 38(6): 379-86.
23. Siessegger M, Schneider BT, Mischkowski RA, Lazar F, Krug B, Klesper B, et al. Use of an image-guided navigation system in dental implant surgery in anatomically complex operation sites.
J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2001; 29(5): 276-81.
24. Nishikawa K, Suehiro A, Sekine H, Kousuge Y, Wakoh M, Sano T. Is linear distance measured by panoramic radiography reliable. Oral Radiol 2010; 26: 16-9.
25. Scher EL. Risk management when operating in the posterior mandible. Implant Dent 2002; 11(1): 67-72.
26. Kobayashi K, Shimoda S, Nakagawa Y, Yamamoto A. Accuracy in measurement of distance using limited cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19(2): 228-31.
27. Stefanelli LV, DeGroot BS, Lipton DI, Mandelaris GA. Accuracy of a dynamic dental implant navigation system in a private practice. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2019; 34(1): 205-13.
Journal of Isfahan Dental School
Volume 18, Issue 2 - Serial Number 2
June 2022
Pages 136-144