Next Article in Journal
The Associations between Individual Factors, eHealth Literacy, and Health Behaviors among College Students
Previous Article in Journal
A Structural Equation Model of Achievement Emotions, Coping Strategies and Engagement-Burnout in Undergraduate Students: A Possible Underlying Mechanism in Facets of Perfectionism
Article

Comparing Accuracy of Implant Installation with a Navigation System (NS), a Laboratory Guide (LG), NS with LG, and Freehand Drilling

by 1, 1,2 and 1,3,*
1
School of Dentistry, College of Dental Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung 80756, Taiwan
2
Division of Family Dentistry, Department of Dentistry, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung 80708, Taiwan
3
Division of Prosthodontics, Department of Dentistry, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung 80708, Taiwan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(6), 2107; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17062107
Received: 4 March 2020 / Revised: 19 March 2020 / Accepted: 20 March 2020 / Published: 22 March 2020
(This article belongs to the Section Digital Health)
The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of implant placement by using the conventional freehand method, the surgical guide alone, the dental navigation system alone, and the dental navigation system with a surgical guide. The participants were aged 20 years or older and were requiring dental implant surgery according to an assessment made by a dentist between July 2014 and December 2017. A total of 128 dental implants were inserted, 32 dental implants in each group, and participants with similar or identical age (i.e., 20–50 years or 50 years or above) and missing tooth locations were paired for comparison. Accuracy was measured by overlaying the real position in the postoperative Cone Beam Computerized Tomography (CBCT) on the virtual presurgical placement of the implant in a CBCT image. Using the dental navigation system with a surgical guide could help dentists to position implants more accurately. Total, longitudinal, and angular error deviation were significantly different (p < 0.0001). The same level of accuracy could be obtained for the different jaws and tooth positions. The one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that the total, longitudinal, and angular errors differed significantly (p < 0.0001). A comparison of the four dental implant surgical methods indicated that the combination of a dental implant navigation system and a surgical guide kit achieved the highest accuracy in terms of the different tooth positions and jaws. View Full-Text
Keywords: accuracy; computer-guided; dental navigation system; implant surgery accuracy; computer-guided; dental navigation system; implant surgery
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Sun, T.-M.; Lee, H.-E.; Lan, T.-H. Comparing Accuracy of Implant Installation with a Navigation System (NS), a Laboratory Guide (LG), NS with LG, and Freehand Drilling. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2107. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17062107

AMA Style

Sun T-M, Lee H-E, Lan T-H. Comparing Accuracy of Implant Installation with a Navigation System (NS), a Laboratory Guide (LG), NS with LG, and Freehand Drilling. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(6):2107. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17062107

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sun, Ting-Mao, Huey-Er Lee, and Ting-Hsun Lan. 2020. "Comparing Accuracy of Implant Installation with a Navigation System (NS), a Laboratory Guide (LG), NS with LG, and Freehand Drilling" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 6: 2107. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17062107

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop