Accuracy Evaluation of 14 Maxillary Full Arch Implant Treatments Performed with Da Vinci Bridge: A Case Series

Pterygoid implant-based maxillary full-arch rehabilitation using an autonomous robot system: A case report

Pterygoid implant placement has been proven to be a viable option in full-arch implant rehabilitation for extremely atrophic maxillae. Nevertheless, the utilization of pterygoid implants remains a challenge for the dentist due to the difficulties of accessing the surgical site and poor visibility. To address these difficulties, digital techniques have been used to enhance the accuracy of pterygoid implant placement. This clinical case describes the application of an autonomous robot system to enhance the precision and efficacy of pterygoid implant placement. The results demonstrated that the integration of automation and real-time imaging provided by the robot system significantly improved the safety and accuracy of the surgical procedure.

Clinical achievements of implantology in the pterygoid region: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature

The purpose of the study is to evaluate the survival rate of pterygoid implants compared to implants placed in different maxilla area and to settle as an alternative solution for the rehabilitation of the posterior maxilla atrophy. Studies that were included for this systematic review were selected using different database of references: PubMed Medline, Lilacs and Cochrane Library. Other journal platforms were also used for the research. Five articles met the strict inclusion/exclusion criteria of the 180 articles founded. This systematic review was registered on Prospero (CRD42023409706) and followed PRISMA statement. A total of 768 implants placed presented 97.43 % with a peak of 100 % of survival rate. Follow-up period varies from a minimum of 1 year to a maximum of six years. Pterygoid implants could be a valid alternative in patients presenting a posterior maxilla atrophy, but results should be interpreted cautiously due to the difficulty of the surgical technique. Further studies in the future should be taken in consideration to confirm the success rate of pterygoid implants since there is only one prospective RCT, potentially incorporating modern technologies such as guided surgery or navigated surgery could be a solution for the success of pterygoid implants, minimizing the risk and less dependent on the operator.

Clinical Outcomes of Pterygoid and Maxillary Tuberosity Implants: A Systematic Review

Background: This study aimed to assess the survival of implants placed in the maxillary tuberosity or in the pterygomaxillary region of the maxilla, based on a systematic review of the literature. Methods: An electronic search was undertaken in three databases. The cumulative survival rate (CSR) was calculated. The log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test was used to compare the survival distributions between some groups. Results: Thirty-eight studies were included, reporting 3446 implants (3053 pterygoid, 393 tuberosity) in 2245 patients, followed up for a mean ± SD of 61.0 ± 36.3 months (min-max, 1-144). A total of 208 pterygoid and 12 tuber implants failed, with a clear concentration of failures in the first year of follow-up and a 10-year CSR of 92.5% and 96.9%, respectively. The survival of pterygoid implants was lower than that of implants in the maxillary tuberosity (p = 0.006; log-rank test), and the survival of implants submitted to early/delayed loading was lower than that of immediately loaded implants (p < 0.001; log-rank test). Non-splinted implants presented higher failure rates. Few cases of intra- or postoperative complications were reported. Conclusions: Implants placed in the pterygoid process/maxillary tuberosity present a high 10-year CSR, although with lower survival for pterygoid in comparison to tuber implants. Pterygoid/tuber implants that are splinted with other implants may present higher survival rates than those that are not splinted.

The influence of radiographic marker registration versus a markerless trace registration method on the implant placement accuracy achieved by dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery. An in-vitro study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare the effect the radiographic marker registration (RMR) and markerless tracing registration (MTR) on implant placement accuracy using a dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery system (dCAIS). Additionally, this study aimed to assess the surgical time and whether the implant location influences the accuracy of the two registration methods.

METHODS

136 dental implants were randomly allocated to the RMR or MTR group and were placed with a dCAIS in resin models. Preoperative and postoperative Cone Beam Computer Tomograms (CBCT) were overlaid and implant placement accuracy was assessed. Descriptive and multivariate analysis of the data was performed.

RESULTS

Significant differences (P < 0.001) were found for all accuracy variables except angular deviation (RMR:4.30° (SD:4.37°); MTR:3.89° (SD:3.32°)). The RMR had a mean 3D platform deviation of 1.53 mm (SD:0.98 mm) and mean apex 3D deviation of 1.63 mm (SD:1.05 mm) while the MTR had lower values (0.83 mm (SD:0.67 mm) and 1.07 mm (SD:0.86 mm), respectively). In the MTR group, implant placement in the anterior mandible was more accurate (p < 0.05). Additionally, MTR did not significantly increase the surgical time compared with RMR (P = 0.489).

CONCLUSIONS

MTR seems to increase the accuracy of implant placement using dCAIS in comparison with the RMR method, without increasing the surgical time. The operated area seems to be relevant and might influence the implant deviations.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Considering the limitations of this in-vitro study, MTR seems to provide a higher accuracy in implant placement using dCAIS without increasing the surgical time. Furthermore, this method does not require radiographic markers and allows re-registration during surgery.

Accuracy of autonomous robotic surgery for dental implant placement in fully edentulous patients: A retrospective case series study

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the accuracy of dental implant placement using the robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) technology in fully edentulous patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fully edentulous and terminal dentition patients were enrolled for r-CAIS technology. Based on the cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) examination, a customized positioning marker and a preoperative surgical plan were created before surgery. During the implant surgery, the implant osteotomy and placement were automatically performed using an autonomous robotic surgery system under the surgeon's supervision. A postoperative CBCT scan was used to determine the discrepancies between the planned and placed implants.

RESULTS

Ten patients with 59 implants underwent autonomous robotic surgery. No adverse surgical events occurred. The deviations of global coronal, global apical, and angular were 0.67 ± 0.37 mm (95% CI: 0.58-0.77 mm), 0.69 ± 0.37 mm (95% CI: 0.59-0.78 mm), and 1.27° ± 0.59° (95% CI: 1.42°-1.11°), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The autonomous r-CAIS technology proved an accurate surgical approach for implant placement in fully edentulous patients due to the control of the angular deviation. Autonomous robotic surgery seems promising as an accurate technology for treating fully edentulous patients. However, further trials are required to provide more hard clinical evidence.

Dynamic Implant Surgery-An Accurate Alternative to Stereolithographic Guides-Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

(1) Background: Dynamic guided surgery is a computer-guided freehand technology that allows highly accurate procedures to be carried out in real time through motion-tracking instruments. The aim of this research was to compare the accuracy between dynamic guided surgery (DGS) and alternative implant guidance methods, namely, static guided surgery (SGS) and freehand (FH). (2) Methods: Searches were conducted in the Cochrane and Medline databases to identify randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective and retrospective case series and to answer the following focused question: "What implant guidance tool is more accurate and secure with regard to implant placement surgery?" The implant deviation coefficient was calculated for four different parameters: coronal and apical horizontal, angular, and vertical deviations. Statistical significance was set at a p-value of 0.05 following application of the eligibility criteria. (3) Results: Twenty-five publications were included in this systematic review. The results show a non-significant weighted mean difference (WMD) between the DGS and the SGS in all of the assessed parameters: coronal (n = 4 WMD = 0.02 mm; p = 0.903), angular (n = 4 WMD = -0.62°; p = 0.085), and apical (n = 3 WMD = 0.08 mm; p = 0.401). In terms of vertical deviation, not enough data were available for a meta-analysis. However, no significant differences were found among the techniques (p = 0.820). The WMD between DGS and FH demonstrated significant differences favoring DGS in three parameters as follows: coronal (n = 3 WMD = -0.66 mm; p =< 0.001), angular (n = 3 WMD = -3.52°; p < 0.001), and apical (n = 2 WMD = -0.73 mm; p =< 0.001). No WMD was observed regarding the vertical deviation analysis, but significant differences were seen among the different techniques (p = 0.038). (4) Conclusions: DGS is a valid alternative treatment achieving similar accuracy to SGS. DGS is also more accurate, secure, and precise than the FH method when transferring the presurgical virtual implant plan to the patient.

Dynamic and static computer-assisted implant surgery for completely edentulous patients. A proof of a concept

OBJECTIVES

To assess the accuracy and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) of the computer-guided "double factor" technique for treating fully edentulous patients.

METHODS

A proof of concept prospective study was designed. Ten consecutive patients requiring full arch dental implant supported rehabilitation in a private practice were enrolled between October 2021 and March 2022. All patients were treated by means of an All-on-four®, and implants were planned and placed according to the "double factor" technique. This technique merges the static and dynamic computer-guided surgical approach in the same surgery. The primary outcome was the accuracy of implant placement, measured by overlapping post- and pre-operative cone-beam computerized tomography with the implant planning. Additionally, PROMs and patient quality of life after surgery were evaluated using different questionnaires. Descriptive and bivariate data analyses were performed. Statistical significance was considered for p < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 48 implants were placed using the "double factor" technique, and 12 full-arch immediate loading prostheses were delivered. The mean angular deviation was 3.74° (standard deviation [SD]: 2). The total linear deviation at the apex and platform of the implant was 1.25 mm (SD: 0.55) and 1.42 mm (SD: 0.64), respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between tilted and axial implants, the upper and lower jaw, or the right and left side. High self-reported satisfaction was registered, and the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) score improved postoperatively (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The "double factor" technique is a valid and accurate treatment approach for fully edentulous patients.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The double factor technique merges the advantages of both the dynamic and static computer assisted surgery approaches, affording accurate and predictable results when treating fully edentulous patients in a minimally invasive manner.

Implants in the pterygoid region: An updated systematic review of modern roughened surface implants

PURPOSE

To determine the survival rates of modern roughened surface dental implants in the pterygoid region.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This systematic review was an update from a previously published systematic review in 2011, which largely reported data on older machined surface dental implants. An electronic search for articles in the English language literature published from January 1, 2010 to December 8, 2021 was performed using PubMed, Scopus, and CENTRAL search engines. After applying a systematic search process in 3 stages, the final list of selected articles on roughened surface pterygoid implants was obtained. Data from the selected articles were collated with data from pertinent articles on roughened implant surface from the previous systematic review. The combined data was then used for calculating the interval survival rate (ISR) and cumulative survival rate (CSR) of pterygoid implants.

RESULTS

The initial electronic search resulted in 1263 titles. The systematic search process eventually resulted in 10 clinical studies reporting on modern roughened surface pterygoid implants. These 10 studies reported on a total of 911 pterygoid implants with 39 reported failures over a 6-year period. The majority of failures (37) were reported during the first year time interval and a majority of them (30) occurred before loading of the pterygoid implants. Only 2 late failures were reported after loading, during the 6^th year time interval. The majority of implants were used for rehabilitation of full arch fixed implant supported prosthesis. At the maximum follow-up interval of 6 years, the cumulative survival rate of pterygoid implants with roughened surfaces was 95.5%, which was 5% higher than reported in the previous systematic review which combined machined and roughed surface pterygoid implants.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival rate of modern roughened surface dental implants in the pterygoid region is favorable at 95.5% over a 6 year period, and comparable to the existing evidence on survival of implants in other regions of the maxilla and mandible. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Dynamic navigation for dental implant placement in single-tooth gaps: A preclinical pilot investigation

OBJECTIVES

To compare the planned (PIP) and transferred implant position (TIP) after dental implant placement in single-tooth gaps utilizing dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (dCAIS).

METHODS

Five pairs of artificial jaws (n = 5) with four single tooth gaps in FDI (Fédération Dentaire Internationale) regions 16, 25, 36 and 44 were manufactured via injection molding technique. Cone beam computed tomographies (CBCTs) were made and digital implant planning of twenty implants (n = 20) was performed with a dynamic navigation system (DNS, Navident, ClaroNav, Toronto, Canada). After guided drilling and manual implant placement, post-operative CBCTs were made. Global deviations at entry point (two-dimensional, 2D), apex (three-dimensional, 3D), apex (vertical, V) and angulation (in degrees, °) were calculated by DNS software. For statistical analysis, level of significance was set to p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Mean deviation at the implants entry point (2D) was 0.78 ± 0.45 mm (range: 0.10-1.63 mm). For the implants apex (3D) and the implants apex (V) deviations were 1.08 ± 0.50 mm (range: 0.33-2.10 mm) and 0.32 ± 0.22 mm (range: 0.02-0.90 mm), respectively. The median angular deviation (°) was 2.81 ± 2.29° (range: 0.56-9.58°). Statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) were found regarding apex (3D), apex (V), and angulation (°) comparing I.-IV. quadrants.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the investigated dCAIS seems to provide satisfactory results regarding TIP in single-tooth gaps in vitro. Due to documented deviations, a safety distance of more than 2 mm should be respected while implant planning in DNS software.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The investigated DNS seems to be reliant in transferring PIP with acceptable deviations in vitro.

Dynamic and static computer-guided surgery using the double-factor technique for completely edentulous patients: A dental technique

A novel computer-assisted surgery (CAS) technique that merges dynamic and static CAS approaches to treat completely edentulous patients with dental implants is described. Radiographic and surgical stents are designed with specific fiducial markers that are recognized by the static and dynamic CAS software program. During the surgical procedure, implants are placed following the static surgical guide and the indications from the dynamic navigation system. This technique combines the advantages of static and dynamic CAS approaches to allow accurate and predictable minimally invasive implant placement.

Accuracy assessment of dynamic computer-aided implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the accuracy of dynamic computer-aided implant surgery (dCAIS) systems when used to place dental implants and to compare its accuracy with static computer-aided implant surgery (sCAIS) systems and freehand implant placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was made to identify all relevant studies reporting on the accuracy of dCAIS systems for dental implant placement. The following PICO question was developed: "In patients or artificial models, is dental implant placement accuracy higher when dCAIS systems are used in comparison with sCAIS systems or with freehand placement? The main outcome variable was angular deviation between the central axes of the planned and final position of the implant. The data were extracted in descriptive tables, and a meta-analysis of single means was performed in order to estimate the deviations for each variable using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Out of 904 potential articles, the 24 selected assessed 9 different dynamic navigation systems. The mean angular and entry 3D global deviations for clinical studies were 3.68° (95% CI: 3.61 to 3.74; I² = 99.4%) and 1.03 mm (95% CI: 1.01 to 1.04; I² = 82.4%), respectively. Lower deviation values were reported in in vitro studies (mean angular deviation of 2.01° (95% CI: 1.95 to 2.07; I² = 99.1%) and mean entry 3D global deviation of 0.46 mm (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.48 ; I² = 98.5%). No significant differences were found between the different dCAIS systems. These systems were significantly more accurate than sCAIS systems (mean difference (MD): -0.86°; 95% CI: -1.35 to -0.36) and freehand implant placement (MD: -4.33°; 95% CI: -5.40 to -3.25).

CONCLUSION

dCAIS systems allow highly accurate implant placement with a mean angular of less than 4°. However, a 2-mm safety margin should be applied, since deviations of more than 1 mm were observed. dCAIS systems increase the implant placement accuracy when compared with freehand implant placement and also seem to slightly decrease the angular deviation in comparison with sCAIS systems.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of dCAIS could reduce the rate of complications since it allows a highly accurate implant placement.

Application of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: An Overview

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a new technical discipline that uses computer technology to research and develop the theory, method, technique, and application system for the simulation, extension, and expansion of human intelligence. With the assistance of new AI technology, the traditional medical environment has changed a lot. For example, a patient's diagnosis based on radiological, pathological, endoscopic, ultrasonographic, and biochemical examinations has been effectively promoted with a higher accuracy and a lower human workload. The medical treatments during the perioperative period, including the preoperative preparation, surgical period, and postoperative recovery period, have been significantly enhanced with better surgical effects. In addition, AI technology has also played a crucial role in medical drug production, medical management, and medical education, taking them into a new direction. The purpose of this review is to introduce the application of AI in medicine and to provide an outlook of future trends.

Digital Approach for the Rehabilitation of the Edentulous Maxilla with Pterygoid and Standard Implants: The Static and Dynamic Computer-Aided Protocols

A full-arch rehabilitation of the edentulous upper jaw without grafting procedures exploits the residual alveolar or the basal bone, with the necessity of long implants placed with a particular orientation. The precision in planning and placing the fixtures is fundamental to avoid clinical problems and to allow an acceptable connection with the prosthesis. The computer-aided implantology resulted in more accuracy than the traditional one, with a high standard of correspondence between the virtual project and the real outcome. This paper reports about the two different digital protocols, static and dynamic, as support to implant-borne prosthetic rehabilitation of edentulous maxillae. Two pterygoid and two/four anterior standard implants were seated in both cases by two different operators, without flap raising, and immediately loaded. This approach avoided the posterior cantilever by-passing the maxillary sinus and was adequately planned and realized without any surgical or prosthetic error. The two digital flow-charts were described step by step, underlining each other’s advantages and drawbacks compared to a free-hand approach.

Validation of an Intra-Oral Scan Method Versus Cone Beam Computed Tomography Superimposition to Assess the Accuracy between Planned and Achieved Dental Implants: A Randomized In Vitro Study

Computer aided implantology is the safest way to perform dental implants. The research of high accuracy represents a daily effort. The validated method to assess the accuracy of placed dental implants is the superimposition of a pre-operative and a post-operative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) with planned and placed implants. This procedure is accountable for a biologic cost for the patient. To investigate alternative procedure for accuracy assessment, fifteen resin casts were printed. For each model, six implants were digitally planned and then placed following three different approaches: (a) template guided free hand, (b) static computer aided implantology (SCAI), and (c) dynamic computer aided implantology (DCAI). The placement accuracy of each implant was performed via two methods: the CBCT comparison described above and a matching between implant positions recovered from the original surgical plan with those obtained with a post-operative intraoral scan (IOS). Statistically significant mean differences between guided groups (SCAI and DCAI) and the free hand group were found at all considered deviations, while no differences resulted between the SCAI and DCAI approaches. Moreover, no mean statistically significant differences were found between CBCT and IOS assessment, confirming the validity of this new method.