Int J Stomatol

Int J Stomatol ›› 2023, Vol. 50 ›› Issue (5): 538-551.doi: 10.7518/gjkq.2023076

• Original Articles • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Meta-analysis of dynamic navigation versus static navigation in the accuracy of implant surgery

Gong Jiaming1(),Zhao Ruimin1,Pan Hongwei2,Lang Xin2,Yu Zhanhai2,Li Jianxue1()   

  1. 1.Dept. of Stomatology, The 940th Hospital of Joint Logistics Support Force of People’s Liberation Army, Lanzhou 730050, China
    2.Dept. of Implantology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
  • Received:2022-11-12 Revised:2023-04-04 Online:2023-09-01 Published:2023-09-01
  • Contact: Jianxue Li E-mail:gongjm19@lzu.edu.cn;370816151@qq.com

RichHTML

48

PDF (PC)

93

Abstract:

Objective To systematically evaluate and compare the accuracy between computer-aided dynamic implant surgery (dCAIS) and computer-aided static navigation (sCAIS) in implant surgery. Methods Databases in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI and Wanfang from January 2000 to May 2022, were searched to identify controlled trials that compared dCAIS and sCAIS. The risk of bias in cohort studies (CS) and randomized controlled stu-dies (RCTs) was assessed using NOS and Jadad scale, respectively. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4 and Stata 16 software. Results A total of 12 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 8 CS and 4 RCTs. Subgroup analysis, which was conducted according to object, edentulous category, navigation system, registration method, indicated that dCAIS resulted in significantly less implant apical deviation (P<0.05) and angular deviation (P<0.05) than sCAIS, except for implant platform deviation (P>0.05). Conclusion Limited evidence implied that dCAIS could achieve higher accuracy in implant surgery than sCAIS. Further evidence from higher-quality clinical studies are needed to supervise the current performance in diverse edentulous category under the coherent navigation system and registration.

Key words: dynamic navigation, static navigation, dental implant, accuracy, Meta-analysis

CLC Number: 

  • R 783

TrendMD: 

Fig 1

The parameters of implant accuracy"

Fig 2

Flow chart of literature screening"

Tab 1

Characteristics of the included studies"

纳入研究（发表时间）研究设计/对象缺牙类型导航系统配准方式种植体特征种植体数结局指标
Chen等[16]（2018）CS/模型上、下颌牙列缺损AqNavi咬合夹板配准

Titanium

3.5 mm×20 mm

50①②③
-牙支持式50

Mediavilla Guzmán

等[17]（2019）

CS/模型24—26牙位Navident解剖标志点配准

BioHorizons

4.6 mm×12 mm

20①②③
-牙支持式20
Kaewsiri等[18]（2019）RCT/患者单颗牙缺失IRIS解剖标志点配准(3.3~4.8) mm×(8~12) mm50①②③
-牙支持式50
Kivovics等[19]（2022）CS/模型下颌牙列缺失Innoole解剖标志点配准

GmbH

4.2 mm×10 mm

16①②③
-骨固位钉16
Sun等[20] （2020）CS/患者上、下颌牙列缺损AqNaviNRNR32②③
-牙支持式32
Tencati等[21]（2019）CS/患者牙列缺损NRNRNR14①②③
-NR86
Wang等[22]（2022）CS/模型21-22和15-16牙位NRU型管配准4.1 mm×10 mm20①②③
-牙支持式20
Wu等[23]（2020）CS/患者前牙、前磨牙缺失DHCU型管配准NR38①②③
-牙支持式57
Yimarj等[24]（2020）RCT/患者连续2颗或3颗牙缺失IRIS面部框架式配准NR30①②③
-牙支持式30
Zhou等[25]（2020）CS/模型35-36和45-46牙位YizhimeiU型管配准

Straumann

4.1 mm×10 mm

40①②③
-牙支持式40
武玉鹏等[26]（2021）RCT/患者牙列缺损易植美U型管配准NR24①②③
-牙支持式22
赵娅琴等[27]（2021）RCT/患者牙列缺损易植美U型管配准Straumann35①②③
-牙支持式35

Tab 2

Risk of bias in cohort studies"

纳入研究（发表时间）研究人群选择（4分）组间可比性（2分）结果测量（3分）结果/分
暴露组的代表性非暴露组选择方法暴露因素确定方法研究开始前无观察指标研究控制重要因素研究控制其他因素结果评价充分性随访时间充分组间随访完整性
Chen等[16]（2018）√√√√√√6
Mediavilla Guzmán等[17]（2019）√√√√√√6
Kivovics等[19]（2022）√√√√√√6
Sun等[20]（2020）√√√√√5
Tencati等[21]（2019）√√√√√√6
Wang等[22]（2022）√√√√√√√7
Wu等[23]（2020）√√√√√√6
Zhou等[25]（2020）√√√√√√6

Tab 3

Risk of bias in randomized controlled trials"

纳入研究（发表时间）随机序列产生（2分）随机化隐藏（2分）盲法（2分）退出与失访（1分）结果/分
恰当不清楚不恰当恰当不清楚不恰当未使用恰当不清楚不恰当
Kaewsiri等[18]（2019）√√√4
Yimarj等[24]（2020）√√√5
武玉鹏等[26]（2021）√√√4
赵娅琴等[27]（2021）√√√3

Fig 3

Meta-analysis of dCAIS and sCAIS based on subjects"

Fig 4

Meta-analysis of dCAIS and sCAIS based on edentulous category"

Fig 5

Meta-analysis of dCAIS and sCAIS for neck center deviation of implants based on navigation system"

Fig 6

Meta-analysis of dCAIS and sCAIS for root tip center deviation of implants based on navigation system"

Fig 7

Meta-analysis of dCAIS and sCAIS for implant angle deviation based on navigation system"

Fig 8

Meta-analysis of dCAIS and sCAIS for subgroup analysis based on registration method on neck center deviation of implant"

Fig 9

Meta-analysis of dCAIS and sCAIS for subgroup analysis based on registration method on root tip center deviation of implant"

Fig 10

Meta-analysis of dCAIS and sCAIS for subgroup analysis based on registration method on implant angle deviation"

Fig 11

Funnel plots of publication bias ofoutcomes included in the study"

1 Alghamdi HS, Jansen JA. The development and future of dental implants[J]. Dent Mater J, 2020, 39(2): 167-172.
2 Clark D, Barbu H, Lorean A, et al. Incidental fin-dings of implant complications on postimplantation CBCTs: a cross-sectional study[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2017, 19(5): 776-782.
3 Angkaew C, Serichetaphongse P, Krisdapong S, et al. Oral health-related quality of life and esthetic outcome in single anterior maxillary implants[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2017, 28(9): 1089-1096.
4 Heitz-Mayfield LJ, Aaboe M, Araujo M, et al. G-roup 4 ITI Consensus Report: risks and biologic co-mplications associated with implant dentistry[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2018, 29(): 351-358.
5 Romanos GE, Delgado-Ruiz R, Sculean A. Concepts for prevention of complications in implant therapy[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2019, 81(1): 7-17.
6 Wismeijer D, Joda T, Flügge T, et al. Group 5 ITI consensus report: Digital technologies[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2018, 29(): 436-442.
7 Block MS, Emery RW, Cullum DR, et al. Implant placement is more accurate using dynamic navigation[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2017, 75(7): 1377-1386.
8 Younes F, Cosyn J, de Bruyckere T, et al. A rando-mized controlled study on the accuracy of free-han-ded, pilot-drill guided and fully guided implant surgery in partially edentulous patients[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2018, 45(6): 721-732.
9 Abduo J, Lau D. Accuracy of static computer-assis-ted implant placement in long span edentulous area by novice implant clinicians: a cross-sectional in vitro study comparing fully-guided, pilot-guided, and freehand implant placement protocols[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2021, 23(3): 361-372.
10 Block MS, Emery RW, Lank K, et al. Implant placement accuracy using dynamic navigation[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2017, 32(1): 92-99.
11 Somogyi-Ganss E, Holmes HI, Jokstad A. Accuracy of a novel prototype dynamic computer-assisted surgery system[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2015, 26(8): 882-890.
12 Jorba-García A, González-Barnadas A, Camps-Font O, et al. Accuracy assessment of dynamic computer-aided implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2021, 25(5): 2479-2494.
13 Pellegrino G, Ferri A, Del Fabbro M, et al. Dynamic navigation in implant dentistry: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2021, 36(5): e121-e140.
14 Schnutenhaus S, Edelmann C, Knipper A, et al. Accuracy of dynamic computer-assisted implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cli-nical and in vitro studies[J]. J Clin Med, 2021, 10(4): 704.
15 Wang FF, Wang QF, Zhang J. Role of dynamic navigation systems in enhancing the accuracy of implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2021, 79(10): 2061-2070.
16 Chen CK, Yuh DY, Huang RY, et al. Accuracy of implant placement with a navigation system, a laboratory guide, and freehand drilling[J]. Int J Oral Ma-xillofac Implants, 2018, 33(6): 1213-1218.
17 Mediavilla Guzmán A, Riad Deglow E, Zubizarreta-Macho Á, et al. Accuracy of computer-aided dyna-mic navigation compared to computer-aided static navigation for dental implant placement: an in vitro study[J]. J Clin Med, 2019, 8(12): E2123.
18 Kaewsiri D, Panmekiate S, Subbalekha K, et al. The accuracy of static vs. dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in single tooth space: a randomized controlled trial[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2019, 30(6): 505-514.
19 Kivovics M, Takács A, Pénzes D, et al. Accuracy of dental implant placement using augmented reality-based navigation, static computer assisted implant surgery, and the free-hand method: an in vitro study[J]. J Dent, 2022, 119: 104070.
20 Sun TM, Lee HE, Lan TH. Comparing accuracy of implant installation with a navigation system (NS), a laboratory guide (LG), NS with LG, and freehand drilling[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2020, 17(6): 2107.
21 Tencati E, Moy P. Accuracy of dynamic computer-aided navigation system for dental implant placement[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2019, 77(9): e68-e69.
22 Wang MZ, Rausch-Fan X, Zhan YL, et al. Comparison of implant placement accuracy in healed and fresh extraction sockets between static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery navigation systems: a model-based evaluation[J]. Materials (Basel), 2022, 15(8): 2806.
23 Wu D, Zhou L, Yang J, et al. Accuracy of dynamic navigation compared to static surgical guide for dental implant placement[J]. Int J Implant Dent, 2020, 6(1): 78.
24 Yimarj P, Subbalekha K, Dhanesuan K, et al. Comparison of the accuracy of implant position for two-implants supported fixed dental prosthesis using static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: a randomized controlled clinical trial[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2020, 22(6): 672-678.
25 Zhou M, Zhou H, Li SY, et al. Comparison of the accuracy of dental implant placement using static and dynamic computer-assisted systems: an in vitro study[J]. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2021, 122(4): 343-348.
26 武玉鹏, 梅东梅, 张琦, 等. 国产数字化动态导航和数字化静态导板在口腔种植手术中的精准度及手术时长分析[J]. 中国口腔颌面外科杂志, 2021, 19(2): 151-155.
Wu YP, Mei DM, Zhang Q, et al. Analysis of accuracy and operation time of domestic digital dynamic navigation and static guide in oral implant surgery[J]. China J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2021, 19(2): 151-155.
27 赵娅琴, 刘艾芃, 岑峰, 等. 动态实时导航与数字化导板导航牙种植精确度的比较[J]. 口腔疾病防治, 2021, 29(3): 178-183.
Zhao YQ, Liu AP, Cen F, et al. Research on the accuracy of dynamic real-time navigation and digital guide navigation implanting techniques[J]. J Prev Treat Stomatol Dis, 2021, 29(3): 178-183.
28 Tahmaseb A, Wu V, Wismeijer D, et al. The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2018, 29(): 416-435.
29 Wei SM, Zhu Y, Wei JX, et al. Accuracy of dynamic navigation in implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2021, 32(4): 383-393.
30 Tahmaseb A, Wismeijer D, Coucke W, et al. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2014, 29(): 25-42.
31 Bover-Ramos F, Viña-Almunia J, Cervera-Ballester J, et al. Accuracy of implant placement with computer-guided surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing cadaver, clinical, and in vitro studies[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2018, 33(1): 101-115.
32 张婷婷, 胡建. 数字化导板与动态导航在口腔种植应用中的研究进展[J]. 国际口腔医学杂志, 2019,46(1): 99-104.
Zhang TT, Hu J. Research progress on the application of surgical template and dynamic navigation system in implant dentistry[J]. Int J Stomatol, 2019,46(1): 99-104.
33 Panchal N, Mahmood L, Retana A, et al. Dynamic navigation for dental implant surgery[J]. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am, 2019, 31(4): 539-547.
34 Widmann G, Stoffner R, Schullian P, et al. Comparison of the accuracy of invasive and noninvasive regi-stration methods for image-guided oral implant surgery[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2010, 25(3): 491-498.
35 Casap N, Wexler A, Eliashar R. Computerized navigation for surgery of the lower jaw: comparison of 2 navigation systems[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2008, 66(7): 1467-1475.
36 田田, 张志宏, 刘红红. 牙种植动态导航配准方式对配准精度的影响[J]. 国际口腔医学杂志, 2020, 47(2): 196-201.
Tian T, Zhang ZH, Liu HH. Effects of different re-gistration methods on the accuracy of navigation registration in dental implants[J]. Int J Stomatol, 2020, 47(2): 196-201.
37 Moon SY, Lee KR, Kim SG, et al. Clinical problems of computer-guided implant surgery[J]. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg, 2016, 38(1): 15.
38 Ozan O, Orhan K, Turkyilmaz I. Correlation between bone density and angular deviation of implants placed using CT-generated surgical guides[J]. J Craniofac Surg, 2011, 22(5): 1755-1761.
39 Block MS, Emery RW. Static or dynamic navigation for implant placement-choosing the method of gui-dance[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2016, 74(2): 269-277.
40 Jung RE, Schneider D, Ganeles J, et al. Computer technology applications in surgical implant den-tistry: a systematic review[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2009, 24(): 92-109.
[1] Han Chong,He Dongning,Yu Feiyan,Wu Dongchao. Research progress on the mechanism and treatment of pain after oral implants [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2024, 51(1): 99-106.
[2] Liao Honglin,Fang Zhonghan,Zhang Yanyan,Liu Fei,Shen Jiefei.. Diagnosis and treatment of post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathic pain after dental implantation [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(6): 729-738.
[3] Zhu Keshi,Liao Anqi,Yu Youcheng.. Research progress on the application of machine learning in dental implantology [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(4): 491-498.
[4] Lu Qian,Xia Haibin,Wang Min.. Research progress on implantoplasty in the treatment of peri-implantitis [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(2): 152-158.
[5] revascularization Meta-analysis of the efficacy comparison between endodontic,Zhuanzhuan apexification Li. OSID） [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(2): 177-185.
[6] Man Yi, Huang Dingming. Combined treatment strategy of oral implantology and endodontics microsurgery: clinical protocol and practical cases (part 2) [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(6): 621-632.
[7] Cai Pingping,Zhuo Yingying,Lin Jie,Zheng Zhi-qiang.. Application of computer-aided technology in fiber post removal [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(6): 731-736.
[8] Man Yi, Huang Dingming. Combined treatment strategy of oral implantology and endodontic microsurgery for bone augmentation and en-dodontic diseases in aesthetic area (part 1): application basis and indications [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(5): 497-505.
[9] Gong Jiaming,Zhao Ruimin,Li Wanxin,Su Linhan,Yu Zhanhai,Li Jianxue. The socket-shield technique for immediate implant placement： a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(5): 537-547.
[10] Zhang Shan,Ge Xiaolei,Li Jie,Xie Xinyu,Chang Weiwei,Ma Wensheng.. Meta-analysis of the long-term effect of maxillary protraction on jaw growth and development [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(5): 548-555.
[11] Ma Yu,Zuo Yu,Zhang Xin. Photodynamic therapy as an adjunct to periodontitis: a meta-analysis [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(3): 305-316.
[12] Wang Yue,Wen Bing,Deng Mengting,Li Jianping. Research advances of low-level laser therapy on peri-implant tissue healing [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(6): 725-730.
[13] Zhou Wanhang,Li Yanfei,Xu Ricong,Wan Qijun. Effects of non-surgical periodontal treatment on risk factors of chronic kidney disease and systematic inflammatory levels in patients with chronic kidney disease and periodontal disease: a Meta-analysis [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(5): 528-535.
[14] Zhu Xuanzhi,Zhao Lei. Research progress on the relationship between hypothyroidism and periodontitis [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(4): 380-384.
[15] Feng Lu,Meng Wenxia. Research progress on the problems of dental implant treatment in patients with common oral mucosal disease [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(2): 147-155.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[2] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[3] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[4] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[5] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[6] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[7] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[8] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[9] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[10] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .