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

Comparison of robotic system and dynamic navigation for zygomatic implant placement: An in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the accuracy of robotic and dynamic navigation systems in assisting zygomatic implant (ZI) using an in vitro model experiment.

METHODS

Preoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of patients who underwent ZI treatment between 2011 and 2023 were collected from local databases. Corresponding three-dimensional resin models were printed and assigned to two groups: the robotic and dynamic navigation system groups. Following preoperative plans, ZIs were placed in the models with the assistance of either a robotic or dynamic navigation system. Deviations in the in vitro navigation surgery were measured and compared between the groups.

RESULTS

A total of 110 ZIs were placed in 56 models, with 55 ZIs in each group. No significant differences were observed in entry and angle deviations between the groups (p>0.05). However, the exit deviation in the robotic system group (2.39±1.24 mm) was larger than that in the dynamic navigation group (1.83±1.25 mm) (p<0.05). On the exit side, the Z-axis deviation in the robotic group (left: -0.28±1.43 mm, right: -0.21±1.30 mm) was smaller than that in the dynamic navigation group (left: 0.76±1.11 mm, right: 0.85±1.52 mm) (p<0.05), while no significant differences were found in X- and Y-axis deviations (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the dynamic navigation system, the robotic system can effectively prevent ZI overextension. However, its accuracy on the exit side is slightly lower than that of the dynamic navigation system.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This preliminary in vitro study showed that the accuracy of the robotic system was slightly inferior to that of the dynamic navigation system in terms of exit deviation when used in ZI placement. Further clinical studies are required to confirm these findings.

The precision of drill calibration for dynamic navigation

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the reproducibility of the drill calibration process in dynamic navigation guided placement of dental implants and to identify the human factors that could affect the precision of this process in order to improve the overall implant placement accuracy.

METHODS

A set of six drills and four implants were calibrated by three operators following the standard calibration process of NaviDent® (ClaroNav Inc.). The reproducibility of the position of each tip of a drill or implant was calculated in relation to the pre-planned implants' entry and apex positions. Intra- and inter-operator reliabilities were reported. The effects of the drill length and shape on the reproducibility of the calibration process were also investigated. The outcome measures for reproducibility were expressed in terms of variability range, average and maximum deviations from the mean distance.

RESULTS

A satisfactory inter-rater reproducibility was noted. The precision of the calibration of the tip position in terms of variability range was between 0.3 and 3.7 mm. We noted a tendency towards a higher precision of the calibration process with longer drills. More calibration errors were observed when calibrating long zygomatic implants with non-locking adapters than with pointed drills. Flexible long-pointed drills had low calibration precision that was comparable to the non-flexible short-pointed drills.

CONCLUSION

The clinicians should be aware of the calibration error associated with the dynamic navigation placement of dental and zygomatic implants. This should be taken in consideration especially for long implants, short drills, and long drills that have some degree of flexibility.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Dynamic navigation procedures are associated with an inherent drill calibration error. The manual stability during the calibration process is crucial in minimising this error. In addition, the clinician must never ignore the prescribed accuracy checking procedures after each calibration process.

Learning curve of dynamic navigation-assisted zygomatic implant surgery: An in vitro study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Dynamic computer-assisted zygomatic implant surgery (dCAZIS) has been reported to provide clinical efficacy with high accuracy and low risk of complications. However, the learning curve before performing dCAZIS effectively is unknown.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to explore the learning curve of dCAZIS in dentists with different levels of experience in implant dentistry and navigation surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Six senior dental students were randomly divided into 3 groups for initial training (FH-CI group: pretraining on freehand conventional implant surgery; FH-ZI group: pretraining on freehand ZI surgery; DN-CI group: pretraining on conventional implant surgery under dynamic navigation). Then, every operator conducted 6 repeated dCAZIS training sessions on edentulous 3-dimensional (3D) printed skull models and was asked to complete a self-report questionnaire after each training session. A total of 36 postoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans with 144 ZI osteotomy site preparations were obtained and superimposed over the preoperative design for accuracy measurements. The operation time, 3D deviations, and results of the self-reports were recorded. Comparisons among groups were analyzed with independent-sample Kruskal-Wallis tests (α=.05), and correlations between study outcomes and the number of practices were calculated.

RESULTS

Operator experience and increased practice times did not significantly affect the accuracy of dCAZIS (P>.05). However, the operation time varied among groups (P<.001), and significantly shortened with more practice, reaching 11.51 ±1.68 minutes at the fifth attempt in the FH-CI group (P<.001 compared with the first practice), 14.48 ±3.07 minutes at the third attempt in the FH-ZI group (P=.038), and 8.68 ±0.58 minutes at the sixth attempt in the DN-CI group (P<.001). All groups reached their own learning curve plateau stage within 6 practice sessions. As the number of practice sessions increased, the results from the self-report questionnaires gradually improved.

CONCLUSIONS

Among dentists with different levels of experience in implant dentistry and navigation surgery, dCAZIS was found to have a learning curve with respect to operation time but not implant accuracy. Experience in ZI surgery had little impact on the learning curve of dCAZIS, but experience in navigation surgery was a key factor.

Long-term survival and complications of Quad Zygoma Protocol with Anatomy-Guided Approach in severely atrophic maxilla: A retrospective follow-up analysis of up to 17 years

INTRODUCTION

The objective of the study was to provide long-term clinical outcomes and complications in the severely atrophic edentulous maxillae treated by means of the quad zygoma protocol (QZP) using the Anatomy-Guided Approach (AGA).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients with severely atrophic edentulous maxilla and insufficient bone height and width in the anterior and posterior regions bilaterally, who underwent rehabilitation with the QZP between May 2006 and December 2021. All patients were followed for at least 1 year. All zygomatic implants (ZIs) were placed by the same surgeon. The primary endpoint of the study was the implant survival rate. Secondary endpoints were implant success rate, prosthesis success rate, complications, and Oral Health-Related Quality of Life using the OHIP-14 questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 56 patients (men 16, women 40) with 224 ZIs (Nobel Biocare, n = 204; Straumann, n = 16; Southern Implant, n = 4) placement were included with a mean follow-up period 8.8 ± 3.9 years (range, 1.2-17.0). The survival (success) rate was 97.7%. Five ZIs in four patients failed. The mean time between implant placement and failure was 8.6 years (range, 0.5-13.3). All patients received immediate loading with acrylic prosthesis. The successful rates for the definitive prosthesis were 98.2%. Forty-two patients received posterior cantilever for rehabilitation of fixed definitive prosthesis. Local orofacial inflammation (35.7%) and Sinusitis (12.5%) were the most common complications, occurring at a mean follow-up of 10.0 (range, 4.2-14.9) and 10.3 (range, 4.3-16.2) years, respectively. In 48 patients, the mean score of the OHIP-14 questionnaire was 1.7 ± 2.6 with the follow-up period of 9.0 ± 4.1 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The rehabilitation of severely atrophic edentulous maxilla using the QZP has shown a predictable and high survival rate in the long term. The implementation of an immediate loading protocol offers potential benefits in stabilizing ZIs with cross-arch stabilization. Moreover, the use of a posterior cantilever in reconstruction can effectively establish functional occlusion through well-distributed ZIs, eliminating the need for additional implant placement.

Bimaxillary Immediate Prosthetic Rehabilitation Using a Custom Maxillary Subperiosteal Implant and Fibula-Free Flap Mandibular Reconstruction After Tumor Ablation

Subperiosteal implants (SPIs) using rigid fixation have recently emerged as an acceptable alternative to conventional endosteal implants when there is limited or absent alveolar bone. Modern advances in digital technology and manufacturing have improved the usability and stability of this latest generation of SPIs. Herein, we present the first reported case of a modern patient-specific SPI placed in the United States and, to the authors' knowledge, the first reported case performed in conjunction with a simultaneous free flap reconstruction of the opposing arch, and immediate dental rehabilitation of both arches in the world.