• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

无牙颌中静态和动态计算机辅助种植手术的准确性和以患者为中心的结果:一项回顾性队列研究。

Accuracy and patient-centered results of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in edentulous jaws: a retrospective cohort study.

机构信息

State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Stomatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.

Department of Implantology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.

出版信息

Clin Oral Investig. 2023 Sep;27(9):5427-5438. doi: 10.1007/s00784-023-05161-5. Epub 2023 Jul 22.

DOI:10.1007/s00784-023-05161-5
PMID:37480368
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare implant positioning accuracy and patient-centered results between static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (s-CAIS and d-CAIS) in edentulous jaws.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The current study retrospectively evaluated a total of 110 implants placed in 22 fully edentulous patients via s-CAIS or d-CAIS (n = 11). The accuracy of implant positioning was assessed by measuring the implant's angular deviation and deviation at the platform and apex from the preoperative design postoperatively. Patient-centered results, including preoperative and intraoperative patient-reported experiences and postoperative patient-reported outcomes, were extracted from the medical records. The nested t test and chi-square test were used to compare accuracy and patient-centered results between s-CAIS and d-CAIS postoperatively.

RESULTS

The implants in the s-CAIS group showed significantly smaller angular deviation (2.32 ± 1.23°) than those in the d-CAIS group (3.87 ± 2.75°). In contrast, the platform and apical deviation were significantly larger in s-CAIS (1.56 ± 1.19 mm and 1.70 ± 1.09 mm, respectively) than d-CAIS (1.02 ± 0.45 mm and 1.00 ± 0.51 mm, respectively). Furthermore, the implants in the s-CAIS group deviated significantly (p < 0.001) more toward the coronal direction than those in the d-CAIS group. Notably, all patients in the s-CAIS group reported an obvious foreign body sensation during surgery, representing a significant difference from the d-CAIS group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to s-CAIS, d-CAIS is a reliable technique for the placement of multiple implants in fully edentulous patients with less linear deviation and less foreign body sensation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The retrospective study was registered on the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on August 8, 2022, with registration number No. ChiCTR2200062484.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Despite the increasing use of computer- assisted implant surgery in fully edentulous patients, clinical evidence comparing implant positioning accuracy and patient-centered results between static and dynamic CAIS systems is scarce. Our study demonstrated that compared to s-CAIS, d-CAIS is a reliable technique for the placement of multiple implants in fully edentulous patients with less linear deviation.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较无牙颌中静态和动态计算机辅助种植手术(s-CAIS 和 d-CAIS)的种植体定位准确性和以患者为中心的结果。

材料与方法

本研究回顾性评估了通过 s-CAIS 或 d-CAIS(n=11)植入 22 名完全无牙颌患者的总共 110 个种植体。术后通过测量种植体的角偏差和平台及根尖处与术前设计的偏差来评估种植体定位的准确性。从病历中提取以患者为中心的结果,包括术前和术中患者报告的体验以及术后患者报告的结果。术后使用嵌套 t 检验和卡方检验比较 s-CAIS 和 d-CAIS 之间的准确性和以患者为中心的结果。

结果

s-CAIS 组的种植体角偏差明显小于 d-CAIS 组(2.32±1.23°比 3.87±2.75°)。相比之下,s-CAIS 的平台和根尖偏差明显更大(分别为 1.56±1.19mm 和 1.70±1.09mm),而 d-CAIS 为 1.02±0.45mm 和 1.00±0.51mm。此外,s-CAIS 组的种植体明显向冠方方向偏斜(p<0.001)。值得注意的是,s-CAIS 组的所有患者在手术中均报告明显异物感,与 d-CAIS 组有显著差异。

结论

与 s-CAIS 相比,d-CAIS 是一种在完全无牙颌患者中放置多个种植体的可靠技术,线性偏差较小,异物感较轻。

试验注册

该回顾性研究于 2022 年 8 月 8 日在中国临床试验注册中心注册,注册号为 ChiCTR2200062484。

临床相关性

尽管计算机辅助种植手术在完全无牙颌患者中的应用日益增多,但比较静态和动态 CAIS 系统之间种植体定位准确性和以患者为中心的结果的临床证据仍然缺乏。我们的研究表明,与 s-CAIS 相比,d-CAIS 是一种在完全无牙颌患者中放置多个种植体的可靠技术,线性偏差较小。

相似文献

1
Accuracy and patient-centered results of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in edentulous jaws: a retrospective cohort study.无牙颌中静态和动态计算机辅助种植手术的准确性和以患者为中心的结果:一项回顾性队列研究。
Clin Oral Investig. 2023 Sep;27(9):5427-5438. doi: 10.1007/s00784-023-05161-5. Epub 2023 Jul 22.
2
The accuracy of implant placement using a combination of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in fully edentulous arches: A prospective controlled clinical study.在全口无牙颌中使用静态和动态计算机辅助种植手术相结合的方法进行种植体植入的准确性:一项前瞻性对照临床研究。
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024 Aug;35(8):841-853. doi: 10.1111/clr.14185. Epub 2023 Sep 26.
3
Comparison of the accuracy of implant position among freehand implant placement, static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in fully edentulous patients: a non-randomized prospective study.全口无牙患者徒手种植体植入、静态和动态计算机辅助种植手术中种植体位置准确性的比较:一项非随机前瞻性研究。
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023 Feb;52(2):264-271. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2022.05.009. Epub 2022 Jun 23.
4
Accuracy of the Yakebot dental implant robotic system versus fully guided static computer-assisted implant surgery template in edentulous jaw implantation: A preliminary clinical study.雅客宝(Yakebot)牙科种植机器人系统与全口无牙颌静态计算机辅助种植手术模板的准确性比较:一项初步临床研究。
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024 Apr;26(2):309-316. doi: 10.1111/cid.13278. Epub 2023 Sep 20.
5
Placement accuracy and primary stability of implants in the esthetic zone using dynamic and static computer-assisted navigation: A retrospective case-control study.使用动态和静态计算机辅助导航技术在美学区域植入物的定位准确性和初期稳定性:一项回顾性病例对照研究。
J Prosthet Dent. 2024 Mar;131(3):427-435. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.11.005. Epub 2022 Dec 5.
6
Accuracy of dental implant placement using static versus dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: An in vitro study.使用静态与动态计算机辅助种植手术进行牙种植体植入的准确性:一项体外研究。
J Dent. 2023 May;132:104487. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104487. Epub 2023 Mar 21.
7
The accuracy of dynamic computer assisted implant surgery in fully edentulous jaws: A retrospective case series.全口无牙颌中动态计算机辅助种植手术的准确性:一项回顾性病例系列研究。
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2023 Nov;34(11):1278-1288. doi: 10.1111/clr.14168. Epub 2023 Aug 29.
8
Accuracy of implant placement using a mixed reality-based dynamic navigation system versus static computer-assisted and freehand surgery: An in Vitro study.基于混合现实的动态导航系统与静态计算机辅助和徒手手术在种植体植入中的准确性比较:一项体外研究。
J Dent. 2024 Jul;146:105052. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105052. Epub 2024 May 9.
9
Accuracy of implant placement via dynamic navigation and autonomous robotic computer-assisted implant surgery methods: A retrospective study.基于动态导航和自主机器人计算机辅助种植手术方法的种植体植入精度:一项回顾性研究。
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024 Feb;35(2):220-229. doi: 10.1111/clr.14216. Epub 2023 Nov 30.
10
Accuracy of dental implant placement using augmented reality-based navigation, static computer assisted implant surgery, and the free-hand method: An in vitro study.使用基于增强现实的导航、静态计算机辅助种植手术和徒手方法进行牙种植体植入的准确性:一项体外研究。
J Dent. 2022 Apr;119:104070. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104070. Epub 2022 Feb 18.

引用本文的文献

1
Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: Patients' Experience and Perspectives.计算机辅助种植手术:患者的体验与观点。
Clin Exp Dent Res. 2025 Jun;11(3):e70143. doi: 10.1002/cre2.70143.

本文引用的文献

1
THE REPORTING QUALITY OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEW ABSTRACTS IN LEADING GENERAL DENTAL JOURNALS: A METHODOLOGICAL STUDY.主流牙科期刊中系统评价摘要的报告质量:一项方法学研究。
J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2023 Mar;23(1):101831. doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2022.101831. Epub 2022 Dec 26.
2
Reducing errors in guided implant surgery to optimize treatment outcomes.降低导引导管种植手术中的误差以优化治疗效果。
Periodontol 2000. 2022 Feb;88(1):64-72. doi: 10.1111/prd.12411.
3
Effect of a dynamic navigation device on the accuracy of implant placement in the completely edentulous mandible: An in vitro study.
动态导航设备对全口无牙下颌骨种植体植入准确性的影响:一项体外研究。
J Prosthet Dent. 2023 Nov;130(5):731-737. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.12.012. Epub 2022 Jan 6.
4
Patient-reported outcome measures comparing static computer-aided implant surgery and conventional implant surgery for single-tooth replacement: A randomized controlled trial.比较静态计算机辅助种植手术和常规种植手术用于单颗牙缺失修复的患者报告结局指标:一项随机对照试验。
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2022 Mar;33(3):278-290. doi: 10.1111/clr.13886. Epub 2022 Jan 2.
5
Comparison of the accuracy of implant placement using different drilling systems for static computer-assisted implant surgery: A simulation-based experimental study.不同静态计算机辅助种植手术种植系统在种植体植入精度方面的比较:基于模拟的实验研究。
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2021 Aug;23(4):635-643. doi: 10.1111/cid.13032. Epub 2021 Jul 19.
6
Comparing patient-reported outcomes and experiences among static, dynamic computer-aided, and conventional freehand dental implant placement: A randomized clinical trial.比较静态、动态计算机辅助和传统徒手放置牙科种植体的患者报告结果和体验:一项随机临床试验。
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2021 Oct;23(5):660-670. doi: 10.1111/cid.13030. Epub 2021 Jul 7.
7
Fully versus conventionally guided implant placement by dental students: A randomized controlled trial.牙科学生全凭指导与传统指导下种植体植入的随机对照试验
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Sep;32(9):1072-1084. doi: 10.1111/clr.13802. Epub 2021 Jul 5.
8
The Impact of Surgical Guide Fixation and Implant Location on Accuracy of Static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery.手术导板固定和种植体位置对静态计算机辅助种植手术精度的影响。
J Prosthodont. 2022 Feb;31(2):155-164. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13371. Epub 2021 May 10.
9
Prosthetically-Driven Full-Mouth Implant-Supported Prostheses Using Guided Surgical Implant Planning with Composite Resin Markers: A Case Report.采用复合树脂标记物引导式外科种植规划的种植全口义齿修复:病例报告。
J Prosthodont. 2021 Aug;30(7):561-568. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13367. Epub 2021 May 4.
10
Accuracy assessment of dynamic computer-aided implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.动态计算机辅助种植体植入的准确性评估:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Clin Oral Investig. 2021 May;25(5):2479-2494. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-03833-8. Epub 2021 Feb 26.