Giovannini Riso Giovanni, Flores-Fraile Javier, Perrone Gianmarco, Tzironi Georgia, Galindo Ana Belén Lobo, Galletti Cosimo, Zubizarreta-Macho Álvaro
Faculty of Dentistry, Alfonso X el Sabio University, 28691 Madrid, Spain.
Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Salamanca, 37008 Salamanca, Spain.
Bioengineering (Basel). 2025 Jun 27;12(7):703. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering12070703.
The objective of the present study was to evaluate and compare the accuracy of the computer-aided static navigation technique (NAV), augmented reality (AR) and freehand placement technique (FHT) for the bicortical orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants for maxillary skeletal expansion (MSE) appliances placed in palate. : A total of 120 bicortical orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants were placed in the palate of ten 3D printed anatomically based polyurethane models of a completely edentulous upper maxilla. The orthodontic mini-implants were randomly assigned to the following placement techniques: (A) computer-aided static navigation technique ( = 40) (NAV), (B) augmented reality device ( = 40) (AR) and (C) conventional freehand technique ( = 40) (FHT). Moreover, two implants were placed in each side of the midpalatal suture in every model according to the digital planification of the expander device. Subsequently, the orthodontic mini-implants were placed and postoperative CBCT scans were performed. Finally, coronal entry-point (mm), apical end-point (mm) and angular deviations (°) were calculated using a -test. : Statistically significant differences were shown at coronal entry-point ( < 0.001), apical end-point ( < 0.001) and angular deviations ( < 0.001) between the three placement techniques of bicortical orthodontic mini-implants. Additionally, statistically significant differences were also shown between the orthodontic mini-implant positions concerning the entry point ( = 0.004) and angular deviation ( = 0.004). : The augmented reality placement technique results are more accurate, followed by the computer-aided static navigation technique and the freehand technique for MSE appliances placed in palate.
本研究的目的是评估和比较计算机辅助静态导航技术（NAV）、增强现实（AR）和徒手植入技术（FHT）在为上颌骨扩弓（MSE）矫治器在上颌腭部植入双皮质正畸自攻微型种植体时的准确性。总共120枚双皮质正畸自攻微型种植体被植入到十个基于三维打印的完全无牙上颌骨解剖聚氨酯模型的腭部。正畸微型种植体被随机分配到以下植入技术：（A）计算机辅助静态导航技术（n = 40）（NAV），（B）增强现实设备（n = 40）（AR）和（C）传统徒手技术（n = 40）（FHT）。此外，根据扩弓器装置的数字化规划，在每个模型的腭中缝两侧各植入两枚种植体。随后，植入正畸微型种植体并进行术后CBCT扫描。最后，使用t检验计算冠状位入口点（mm）、根尖端点（mm）和角度偏差（°）。在双皮质正畸微型种植体的三种植入技术之间，冠状位入口点（P < 0.001）、根尖端点（P < 0.001）和角度偏差（P < 0.001）显示出统计学上的显著差异。此外，正畸微型种植体在入口点（P = 0.004）和角度偏差（P = 0.004）方面的位置也显示出统计学上的显著差异。对于在上颌腭部植入的MSE矫治器，增强现实植入技术的结果更准确，其次是计算机辅助静态导航技术和徒手技术。
