Suppr超能文献

动态导航与静态导板相邻平行种植体植入准确性的比较评估:一项前瞻性研究

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

作者信息

Parekar Dnyaneshwar, Selvaganesh Sahana, Nesappan Thiyaneswaran

机构信息

Implantology, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Chennai, IND.

Prosthodontics and Implantology, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Chennai, IND.

出版信息

Cureus. 2024 Mar 31;16(3):e57331. doi: 10.7759/cureus.57331. eCollection 2024 Mar.

Abstract

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.

摘要

目的 本研究旨在比较动态导航(DN)和静态导板(SG)在同时进行相邻平行种植体植入时的准确性、手术所需时间以及器械操作的便捷性。材料与方法 本前瞻性试验于2022年10月至2023年2月在Saveetha牙科学院种植科进行。共有20例需要同时进行相邻牙种植的患者被随机分为两组:第1组为SG手术组,第2组为DN手术组。共植入40颗种植体,20颗在DN引导下植入,20颗在SG引导下植入。比较两组之间的颊舌向移位、根尖冠向移位、近远中移位和近远中角度。两组患者的数据由手术医生评估,同时记录手术时间和器械操作的便捷性。结果 在DN组和SG组接受种植体植入的20例患者均有后牙区相邻牙缺失,包括下颌后牙(70%)和上颌后牙(30%)。相邻平行种植体的前种植体在近远中移位和角度方面的精度有所提高。第1组(SG)的近远中移位为5.61 + 3.1毫米,高于第2组(DN)的0.55 + 0.56毫米。第2组的近远中角度为3.1 + 2.9度,第1组为0.42 + 0.5度。第二颗种植体在近远中移位、近远中角度和颊舌向移位方面有显著差异(p < 0.005)。第1组组间手术时间(均值 + 标准差)为30 + 4.5分钟,第2组为60.7 + 10.1分钟,p < 0.05,具有统计学意义。SG组手术医生的舒适度更好。结论 任何数字化辅助种植体植入技术都可以提高植入准确性,但每种技术都有其不足之处。实现最高水平的精度和持久的修复效果取决于所选病例的适用性和进行种植体植入的外科医生的专业技能。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0072/11061662/d81001f9beee/cureus-0016-00000057331-i01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验