Accuracy of a flapless protocol for computer-guided zygomatic implant placement in human cadavers: expectations and reality

Clinical efficacy of computer-assisted zygomatic implant surgery: A systematic scoping review

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Digital technology can improve the success of zygomatic implant (ZI) surgery. However, the reliability and efficacy of computer-assisted zygomatic implant surgery (CAZIS) need further analysis.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this scoping review was to provide an overview of the placement accuracy, implant survival, and complications of CAZIS.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search of English and Mandarin Chinese publications up to May 2023 was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Wanfang database. The nonpeer-reviewed literature was searched in the trial register (clinicaltrials.gov). Clinical studies and cadaver studies on CAZIS were included. After data extraction and collection, the findings were critically reviewed, analyzed, interpreted, and discussed.

RESULTS

Forty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. After excluding publications with duplicate data, retaining the most recent, 28 articles were included in this scoping review. Of these, 18 were on static computer-assisted zygomatic implant surgery (sCAZIS), 8 on dynamic computer-assisted zygomatic implant surgery (dCAZIS), and 2 on robot-assisted zygomatic implant surgery (rAZIS). Excluding the outliers, the mean deviations of ZIs in the sCAZIS group (with 8 articles reporting implant placement accuracy, 183 ZIs involved) were: 1.15 ±1.37 mm (coronal deviation), 2.29 ±1.95 mm (apical deviation), and 3.32 ±3.36 degrees (angular deviation). The mean deviations of dCAZIS (3 articles, 251 ZIs) were: 1.60 ±0.74 mm (coronal), 2.27 ±1.05 mm (apical), and 2.89 ±1.69 degrees (angular). The mean deviations of rAZIS (2 articles, 5 ZIs) were: 0.82 ±0.21 mm (coronal), 1.25 ±0.52 mm (apical), and 1.46 ±0.35 degrees (angular). Among the CAZIS reported in the literature, the implant survival rate was high (96.3% for sCAZIS, 98.2% for dCAZIS, and 100% for rAZIS, specified in 14 of 21 clinical studies). The incidence of complications was low, but, because of the few relevant studies (4/21 specified), valid conclusions regarding complications could not be drawn.

CONCLUSIONS

CAZIS has demonstrated clinical efficacy with high implant survival rates and placement accuracy. Of the 3 guided approaches, rAZIS showed the smallest 3-dimensional deviation.

Application of titanium 3D-printed double-sleeve guide for zygomatic implants: A technique report

The unique anatomical structure of the atrophic edentulous maxilla limits the placement of endosteal root form dental implants without bone grafting and augmentation. Surgical placement of zygomatic implants in an optimal position remains challenging. This technique report illustrates a novel digital guide technology, including the design workflow, application method, and indications for assisting with the placement of zygomatic implants using a bone-supported titanium double-sleeve guide. In addition, when the implant body reaches the zygomatic bone following an intra-sinus path, including ZAGA type 0 and ZAGA type 1 cases, a matching window osteotomy surgical guide is used to locate the lateral window boundary and protect the sinus membrane. With this technique, the surgical procedure is simplified, and the precision of guided zygomatic implant placement is improved.

The Accuracy of Zygomatic Implant Placement Assisted by Dynamic Computer-Aided Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

The present systematic review aimed to investigate the accuracy of zygomatic implant (ZI) placement using dynamic computer-aided surgery (d-CAIS), static computer-aided surgery (s-CAIS), and a free-hand approach in patients with severe atrophic edentulous maxilla and/or deficient maxilla.

METHODS

Electronic and manual literature searches until May 2023 were performed in the PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. Clinical trials and cadaver studies were selected. The primary outcome was planned/placed deviation. Secondary outcomes were to evaluate the survival of ZI and surgical complications. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted and meta-regression was utilized to compare fiducial registration amounts for d-CAIS and the different designs of s-CAIS.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies with 511 ZIs were included (Nobel Biocare: 274, Southern Implant: 42, SIN Implant: 16, non-mentioned: 179). The pooled mean ZI deviations from the d-CAIS group were 1.81 mm (95% CI: 1.34-2.29) at the entry point and 2.95 mm (95% CI: 1.66-4.24) at the apex point, and angular deviations were 3.49 degrees (95% CI: 2.04-4.93). The pooled mean ZI deviations from the s-CAIS group were 1.19 mm (95% CI: 0.83-1.54) at the entry point and 1.80 mm (95% CI: 1.10-2.50) at the apex point, and angular deviations were 2.15 degrees (95% CI: 1.43-2.88). The pooled mean ZI deviations from the free-hand group were 2.04 mm (95% CI: 1.69-2.39) at the entry point and 3.23 mm (95% CI: 2.34-4.12) at the apex point, and angular deviations were 4.92 degrees (95% CI: 3.86-5.98). There was strong evidence of differences in the average entry, apex, and angular deviation between the navigation, surgical guide, and free-hand groups (p < 0.01). A significant inverse correlation was observed between the number of fiducial screws and the planned/placed deviation regarding entry, apex, and angular measurements.

CONCLUSION

Using d-CAIS and modified s-CAIS for ZI surgery has shown clinically acceptable outcomes regarding average entry, apex, and angular deviations. The maximal deviation values were predominantly observed in the conventional s-CAIS. Surgeons should be mindful of potential deviations and complications regardless of the decision making in different guide approaches.

Dynamic navigation for zygomatic implant placement: A randomized clinical study comparing the flapless versus the conventional approach

OBJECTIVES

The assessment of the accuracy of flapless placement of zygomatic implants in edentulous maxilla using dynamic navigation.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was carried out on 20 patients. Patients were randomized into two groups, the flapless (Group 1; n=10) and the conventional (Group 2; n=10). In each case two zygomatic implants were inserted under local anaesthesia, one on the right and one on the left side guided by a dynamic navigation system. The surgical procedure was identical in the two groups except for the reflection of the mucoperiosteal flap which was eliminated in the flapless cases. Postoperative CBCT scans were used to assess the accuracy of the placement of zygomatic implants.

RESULTS

Osseointegration was achieved for all the implants, except one case in the flapless group. Statistically significant differences in the accuracy of the position of the zygomatic implants was found between the flapless and the conventional groups, measured at the apex and the entry points of the implants (p < 0.01). The average apical and coronal deviations were 5 mm and 3 mm, respectively; the angular deviation was 6°, and 2 mm vertical apical disparity was detected between the planned and the achieved surgical position. Perforation of the Schneiderian membrane was noted in three cases, one in flapless group and two in the conventional group.

CONCLUSIONS

Flapless placement of zygomatic implants guided by dynamic navigation offered satisfactory safety and accuracy.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This is the first clinical trial to prove the feasibility and accuracy of flapless placement of zygomatic implant with minimal morbidity. The study highlights the innovative reflection of the Schneiderian membrane under guided surgical navigation. The procedure can be performed under local anaesthesia, which offers clinical advantages. Adequate training on the use of dynamic navigation is mandatory before its use in clinical cases.

Survival and complications of zygomatic implants compared to conventional implants reported in longitudinal studies with a follow-up period of at least 5 years: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Zygomatic implants (ZI) have been frequently indicated to rehabilitate patients with extensive atrophies in alternatives to major bone reconstructions. It can be installed inside the maxillary sinus, called instrasinus zygomatic implant (IZI) or outside the maxillary sinus (EZI), depending on the surgery technique.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the survival and complication rates of ZI in longitudinal studies when compared with conventional implants (CI).

METHODS

An electronic search was performed in five databases and in Gray literature for articles published until April, 2022. The eligibility criteria comprised observational cohort studies (prospective or retrospective) and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with at least 5 years of follow-up, reporting survival rate of ZI versus CI. A meta-analysis was conduct with 18 studies.

RESULTS

A total of 5434 implants (2972 ZI and 2462 CI) were analyzed in 1709 patients. The mean survival rate was 96.5% ± 5.02 and 95.8% ± 6.36 for ZI and CI, respectively (mean follow-up time of 78 months). There were observed no statistically significant between ZI and CI in prospective studies (risk ratio [RR] of 1.21; 95% confidence intervals [CIs]: 0.28 to 5.28; chi-squared [Chi² ] = 11.37; I²  = 56%; degrees of freedom [df] = 5; z-score = 0.25; P = 0.80), retrospective studies IZI (RR of 1.29; 95% CIs: 0.52 to 3.23; Chi²  = 4.07; I²  = 2%; df = 4; z-score = 0.55; P = 0.58) and retrospective studies EZI (RR of 0.72; 95% CIs: 0.31 to 1.66; Chi²  = 1.99; I²  = 0%; df = 3; z-score = 0.78; P = 0.44). The biological complications most related to ZI was sinusitis, followed by infection and oroantral communication.

CONCLUSION

ZI have a high long-term survival rate (96.5% with a mean of 91.5 months of follow-up), showing no significant difference when compared with CI. The most prevalent biological complication is sinusitis, being most commonly to the IZI technique. This systematic review (SR) was registered in INPLASY under number INPLASY202280025.

Flapless placement of zygomatic implants using dynamic navigation: an innovative technical note

Zygomatic implants are routinely used for the rehabilitation of the midface and edentulous maxilla; the procedure is carried out under general anaesthesia and requires the direct lifting of the Schneiderian membrane. A prefabricated surgical guide is usually used to direct the position of the zygomatic implants during surgery. This proof-of-concept study explored an innovative flapless approach for placement of zygomatic implants guided by dynamic navigation. Under local anaesthesia eight zygomatic implants were placed using a flapless technique. The preplanned position of zygomatic implants was transferred to the operating theatre using dynamic navigation, which guided the sinus lift procedure and the planned osteotomy. Operative complications were recorded, the accuracy of the implant position was measured and postoperative morbidities including pain and swelling were evaluated. Surgical complications were minimal, the Schneiderian membrane was intact in all the cases except one, which required the application of resorbable collagen membrane. Satisfactory accuracy was achieved regarding the precision of implant position and angulation. One of the patients developed maxillary sinusitis three months following surgery. Postoperative pain and swelling were minimal. The dynamic navigation guided flapless placement of zygomatic implants under local anaesthesia is a feasible technique with minimal surgical complications and postoperative morbidities.

Zygomatic implant placement using a robot-assisted flapless protocol: proof of concept

Robotic assistance can help in physically guiding the drilling trajectory during zygomatic implant positioning. A new robot-assisted strategy for a flapless zygomatic implant placement protocol is reported here. In this protocol, a preoperative computed tomography scan is used to plan the surgical path. After surface registration, the ROSA robot (Zimmer Biomet Robotics) guides several steps, which are performed with shared control. The surgeon performs the drilling and tapping, guided by the robotic arm, which is positioned according to the planned trajectory. Placement of the zygomatic implant is done manually. Immediate intraoperative 3D verification is performed by cone beam computed tomography (flat-panel detector, Medtronic O-arm II). Four zygomatic implants were placed in the case patient according to the flapless protocol, with a mean vector error of 1.78 mm (range 0.52-4.70 mm). A screw-retained temporary prosthesis was placed on the same day. No significant complications were observed. The application of this robot-assisted surgical protocol, which guarantees a very high degree of precision, may reduce inaccuracies in the positioning of zygomatic implants that could deviate from the surgeon's plan. This appears to be a potentially safe flapless surgery technique. Drill slipping on the crest or on the maxillary wall is the main source of error in this procedure, emphasizing the usefulness of the assisted surgical guidance with haptic feedback.

Reliability and accuracy of dynamic navigation for zygomatic implant placement

Objectives

To assess the accuracy of a real‐time dynamic navigation system applied in zygomatic implant (ZI) surgery and summarize device‐related negative events and their management.

Material and methods

Patients who presented with severely maxillary atrophy or maxillary defects and received dynamic navigation‐supported ZI surgery were included. The deviations of entry, exit, and angle were measured after image data fusion. A linear mixed‐effects model was used. Statistical significance was defined as p < .05. Device‐related negative events and their management were also recorded and analyzed.

Results

Two hundred and thirty‐one zygomatic implants (ZIs) with navigation‐guided placement were planned in 74 consecutive patients between Jan 2015 and Aug 2020. Among them, 71 patients with 221 ZIs received navigation‐guided surgery finally. The deviations in entry, exit, and angle were 1.57 ± 0.71 mm, 2.1 ± 0.94 mm and 2.68 ± 1.25 degrees, respectively. Significant differences were found in entry and exit deviation according to the number of ZIs in the zygomata (p = .03 and .00, respectively). Patients with atrophic maxillary or maxillary defects showed a significant difference in exit deviation (p = .01). A total of 28 device‐related negative events occurred, and one resulted in 2 ZI failures due to implant malposition. The overall survival rate of ZIs was 98.64%, and the mean follow‐up time was 24.11 months (Standard Deviation [SD]: 12.62).

Conclusions

The navigation‐supported ZI implantation is an accurate and reliable surgical approach. However, relevant technical negative events in the navigation process are worthy of attention.

Accuracy of digital planning in zygomatic implants

Background

Zygomatic implants have been described as a therapeutic alternative for patients with severe maxillary atrophy in order to avoid bone augmentation procedures. Taking that into account, in these treatments, the key factor is the position of the implant, the virtual surgical planning (VSP) is widespread among most clinicians before surgery on the patient. However, there are no studies which evaluate the clinical relevance of these VSP.

The aim of this study is to determine whether digital planning on zygomatic implants has any influence on the implant dimensions and position, even when performing conventional surgery afterwards.

Results

Fourteen zygomatic implants were placed in four patients. Pre-operative and post-operative helicoidal computed tomography were performed to each patient to allow the comparison between the digital planning and the final position of implants. Tridimensional deviation (TD), mesio-distal deviation (MDD), bucco-palatine deviation (BPD), and apico-coronal deviation (ACD) were evaluated as well as angular deviation (AD). Significative differences in apical TD were observed with a mean of 6.114 ± 4.28 mm (p < 0.05). Regarding implant position, only implants placed in the area of the first right molar reported significant differences (p < 0.05) for ACD. Also, implant length larger than 45 mm showed BPD significative differences (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Zygomatic implant surgery is a complex surgical procedure, and although VSP is a useful tool which helps the clinician determine the number and the length of zygomatic implants as well as its proper position, surgical experience is still mandatory.

The Morpho-Functional Three-Dimensional Analysis for Zygomatic Implants: A Clinical Tool With Surgical Implications

ABSTRACT

Zygomatic implants (ZIs) have been used successfully for the rehabilitation of jaws with severe atrophy for the past 2 decades. The development of computed tomography, three-dimensional (3D) analysis software, and stereolithographic models has positively impacted the development of preoperative planning. This article describes the protocol developed by the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of El Bosque University, Bogotá, Colombia, through 10 years of experience, for the installation of ZIs, covering from the times when the implants were placed through intraoperative guidance, until now, in which drilling guides developed by computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing are used, without neglecting in their design multiple factors that must be considered. To date, this protocol for the treatment of patients with atrophic jaws through ZIs includes a detailed clinical examination, in which variables such as bone and dental relationship between the jaws, oral opening and dynamic interaction between soft cervicofacial tissues are considered. It also includes a 3D computed tomography planning for the design and preparation of surgical guides whose insertion patterns must be executable during surgery. Together, clinical and imaging analysis converge in what it has been called morpho-functional 3D planning.

Dentronics: Towards robotics and artificial intelligence in dentistry

OBJECTIVES

This paper provides an overview of existing applications and concepts of robotic systems and artificial intelligence in dentistry. This review aims to provide the community with novel inputs and argues for an increased utilization of these recent technological developments, referred to as Dentronics, in order to advance dentistry.

METHODS

First, background on developments in robotics, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are reviewed that may enable novel assistive applications in dentistry (Sec A). Second, a systematic technology review that evaluates existing state-of-the-art applications in AI, ML and robotics in the context of dentistry is presented (Sec B).

RESULTS

A systematic literature research in pubmed yielded in a total of 558 results. 41 studies related to ML, 53 studies related to AI and 49 original research papers on robotics application in dentistry were included. ML and AI have been applied in dental research to analyze large amounts of data to eventually support dental decision making, diagnosis, prognosis and treatment planning with the help of data-driven analysis algorithms based on machine learning. So far, only few robotic applications have made it to reality, mostly restricted to pilot use cases.

SIGNIFICANCE

The authors believe that dentistry can greatly benefit from the current rise of digital human-centered automation and be transformed towards a new robotic, ML and AI-enabled era. In the future, Dentronics will enhance reliability, reproducibility, accuracy and efficiency in dentistry through the democratized use of modern dental technologies, such as medical robot systems and specialized artificial intelligence. Dentronics will increase our understanding of disease pathogenesis, improve risk-assessment-strategies, diagnosis, disease prediction and finally lead to better treatment outcomes.

Exploring Effectiveness of Computer-Aided Planning in Implant Positioning for a Single Immediate Implant Placement

The value of computer-aided implant planning using cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) for single immediate implants was explored. Eighteen patients requiring extraction of a tooth followed by a single immediate implant were enrolled. Small volume preoperative CBCT scans were used to plan the position of the implant. A taper screwed–type implant was immediately placed into a fresh socket using only the final 1 or 2 drills for osteotomy. Postoperative CBCTs were used for the analysis of actual implant placement positioning. Measurements of the planned and the actual implant position were made with respect to their position relative to the adjacent teeth. Mesio-distal displacements and the facial-lingual deviation of the implant from the planned position were determined. Changes in the angulation of the planned and actual implant position in relation to the clinical crown were also measured. To statistically summarize the results, box plots and 95% CIs for means of paired differences were used. The analysis showed no statistical difference between the planned position and final implant placement position in any measurement. The CBCT scans coupled with the computer-aided implant planning program along with a final 1-to-2 drill protocol may improve the accuracy of single immediate implant placement for taper screwed–type implants.