{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Comparative Evaluation of Accuracy of Adjacent Parallel Implant Placements Between Dynamic Navigation and Static Guide: A Prospective Study.
{Author}: Parekar D;Selvaganesh S;Nesappan T;
{Journal}: Cureus
{Volume}: 16
{Issue}: 3
{Year}: 2024 Mar
暂无{DOI}: 10.7759/cureus.57331
{Abstract}: Aim The study aims to compare the accuracy of dynamic navigation (DN) and static guides (SGs) for simultaneous adjacent parallel placement of implants, the time taken for the surgery, and the ease of handling the instruments. Materials and methods This prospective trial was carried out at the Department of Implantology of Saveetha Dental College from October 2022 to February 2023. A total of 20 patients who needed simultaneous adjacent dental implants were allocated randomly into two groups: Group 1 SG surgery and Group 2 DN surgery. Forty implants were placed, 20 under DN and 20 under SG. Bucco-lingual displacement, apico-coronal displacement, mesiodistal displacement, and mesiodistal angulation were compared between the two groups. The patients' data in both groups were evaluated by operating surgeons along with the surgical time taken and the ease of handling of instruments. Results The 20 patients who underwent implant placement in the DN and SG groups all had adjacent missing teeth in posterior sites, including lower posteriors (70%) and upper posteriors (30%). There was improved precision in relation to the mesiodistal displacement and angulation of the anterior implant of the adjacent parallel implants. The mesiodistal displacement in Group 1 (SG) was 5.61 + 3.1 mm, which was higher than Group 2 (DN), which was 0.55 + 0.56 mm. The mesiodistal angulation was 3.1 + 2.9 degrees in Group 2 and 0.42 + 0.5 degrees in Group 1. The second implant had a significant difference (p < 0.005) in mesiodistal displacement, mesiodistal angulation, and bucco-lingual displacement. The difference between the intergroup surgical time (mean + SD) in Group 1 was 30 + 4.5 mins and in Group 2 was 60.7 + 10.1 mins, with p < 0.05 statistically significant. The comfort of the operator was better in the SG group. Conclusion Any digitally aided implant placement technique can improve placement accuracy but each has its downfalls. Achieving the highest levels of precision and long-lasting prosthetic results hinges on both the suitability of the chosen case and the expertise of the surgeon performing the implant placement.