You are currently viewing Acurácia da instalação de implantes em cirurgia estática e por navegação dinâmica em edêntulos parciais: revisão sistemática

Acurácia da instalação de implantes em cirurgia estática e por navegação dinâmica em edêntulos parciais: revisão sistemática

Autores

1 – Denis Henrique Dias Reghini
Mestre em Odontologia Digital – São Leopoldo Mandic. 0009-0000-1105-9292.

2 – Jenival Correia de Almeida Jr.
Doutor em Implantodontia e especialista em Prótese Dentária – São Leopoldo Mandic. 0000-0003-4828-5319.

3– Eduardo Mukai
Doutor em Ciências da Odontologia – Fousp. 0000-0002-0408-5799.

4 – Newton Sesma
Doutor em Prótese Dentária – Fousp. 0000-0001-5044-1742.

 

DOI: https://doi.org/10.71440/2675-5610.10.2.25.178-185.art


Resumo

Objetivo: avaliar a acurácia das cirurgias estáticas e dinâmicas assistidas por computador em edêntulos parciais. Material e métodos: esta revisão sistemática seguiu as diretrizes PRISMA. A busca foi realizada nas bases de dados PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register e Science Direct, abrangendo artigos em inglês publicados entre 1981 e 2023. A estratégia de busca incluiu termos relacionados a mandíbulas edêntulas parciais e cirurgias assistidas por computador. Foram incluídos ensaios clínicos randomizados, estudos de intervenção não randomizados e estudos in vitro. A avaliação de risco de viés utilizou as ferramentas RoB 2, ROBINS-I e CRIS checklist adaptada. Resultados: foram identificados 524 estudos, sendo 15 incluídos na análise final. Dentre esses, quatro estudos possuíam baixo risco de viés (dois ECRs e dois intervencionais). Os outros 11 estudos apresentavam risco moderado de viés em seis deles (um ECR e cinco intervencionais). O risco elevado de viés foi encontrado em cinco estudos (três ECRs e dois in vitro). Nos estudos ECRs com baixo risco de viés, não foram observadas diferenças significativas para os desvios apicais, coronários e angulares entre os dois métodos cirúrgicos. Conclusão: a acurácia das cirurgias estáticas e dinâmicas em edêntulos parciais é moderada, não sendo suportada por estudos bem delineados. A análise revela a necessidade de novos ensaios clínicos randomizados controlados, com amostras maiores e baixo risco de viés, para uma melhor avaliação da eficácia dessas técnicas. Estudos futuros devem focar na padronização dos métodos e na redução das variabilidades para fornecer evidências mais robustas e conclusivas sobre a acurácia dessas abordagens cirúrgicas.

Palavras-chave: Arcada edêntula; Cirurgia assistida por computador; Implantação dentária.


Accuracy of guided static and dinamic implant surgery on partially edentulous patients: systematic review

Abstract

Objective: to evaluate the accuracy of static and dynamic computer-assisted surgeries in partially edentulous patients. Material and methods: this systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines. The search was conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, and Science Direct databases, covering articles published in English between 1981 and 2023. The search strategy included terms related to partially edentulous jaws and computer-assisted surgeries. Randomized clinical trials, non-randomized intervention studies, and in vitro studies were included. The risk of bias assessment used the RoB 2, ROBINS-I, and adapted CRIS checklist tools. Results: a total of 524 studies were identified, of which 15 were included in the final analysis. From these, 4 studies had a low level of bias (2 RCTs, 2 interventional). The other 11 studies presented a moderate risk of bias in 6 of them (1 RCT, 5 interventional). A high risk of bias was found in 5 studies (3 RCTs, 2 in vitro). Regarding the RCTs with a low risk of bias, no statistically significant differences were identified for the apical, coronal, and angular deviations between these two surgical methods. Conclusion: the accuracy of static and dynamic surgeries in partially edentulous patients is moderate and still not supported by well-designed studies. The analysis reveals the need for new randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes and low risk of bias to better assess the efficacy of these techniques. Future studies should focus on method standardization and to reduce the variability to provide more robust and conclusive evidence on the accuracy of these surgical approaches.

Keywords: Jaw; Edentulous; Surgery; Computer-assisted; Dental implantation.

Referências

  1. Katsoulis J, Pazera P, Mericske-Stern R. Prosthetically driven, computer-guided implant planning for the edentulous maxilla: a model study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2009;(11):238-45.
  2. Fortin T, Bosson JL, Isidori M, Blanchet E. Effect of flapless surgery on pain experienced in implant placement using an image-guided system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21(2):298-304.
  3. Reyes A, Turkyilmaz I, Prihoda TJ. Accuracy of surgical guides made from conventional and a combination of digital scanning and rapid prototyping techniques. J Prosthet Dent 2015;113(4):295-303.
  4. Kernen F, Benic GI, Payer M, Schär A, Müller-Gerbi M, Filippi A et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional printed templates for guided implant placement based on matching a surface scan with CBCT. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2016;18(4):762-8.
  5. Kühl S, Payer M, Zitzmann NU, Lambrecht JT, Filippi A. Technical accuracy of printed surgical templates for guided implant surgery with the coDiagnostiX software. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015;17(suppl.1):177-82.
  6. Gallardo YNR, da Silva-Olivo IRT, Mukai E, Morimoto S, Sesma N, Cordaro L. Accuracy comparison of guided surgery for dental implants according to the tissue of support: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017;28(5):602-12.
  7. Behneke A, Burwinkel M, Knierim K, Behneke N. Accuracy assessment of cone beam computed tomography-derived laboratory-based surgical templates on partially edentulous patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23(2):137-43.
  8. Zhao XZ, Xu WH, Tang ZH, Wu MJ, Zhu J, Chen S. Accuracy of computer-guided implant surgery by a CAD/CAM and laser scanning technique. Chin J Dent Res 2014;17(1):31-6.
  9. Naziri E, Schramm A, Wilde F. Accuracy of computer-assisted implant placement with insertion templates. GMS Interdiscip Plast Reconstr Surg DGPW 2016;5:doc15.
  10. Beretta M, Poli PP, Maiorana C. Accuracy of computer-aided template-guided oral implant placement: a prospective clinical study. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2014;44(4):184-93.
  11. Van Assche N, Van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M, Jacobs R. Accuracy assessment of computer-assisted flapless implant placement in partial edentulism. J Clin Periodontol 2010;37:398-403.
  12. Alzoubi F, Massoomi N, Nattestad A. Accuracy assessment of immediate and delayed implant placements using CAD/CAM surgical guides. J Oral Implantol 2016;42(5):391-8.
  13. Scherer U, Stoetzer M, Ruecker M, Gellrich NC, Von See C. Template-guided vs. non-guided drilling in site preparation of dental implants. Clin Oral Investig 2015;19(6):1339-46.
  14. Schnutenhaus S, Edelmann C, Rudolph H, Dreyhaupt J, Luthardt RG. 3D accuracy of implant positions in template-guided implant placement as a function of the remaining teeth and the surgical procedure: retrospective study. Clin Oral Investig 2018;22(6):2363-72.
  15. Schneider D, Sancho-Puchades M, Muhlemann S, Jung R, Hammerle C. A randomized controlled clinical comparing conventional and computer-assisted implant planning and placement in partially edentulous patients. Part 4: accuracy of implant placement. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2019;39(4):111-22.
  16. Younes F, Cosyn J, De Bruyckere T, Cleymaet R, Bouckaert E, Eghbali A. A randomized controlled study on the accuracy of free-handed, pilot-drill guided and fully guided implant surgery in partially edentulous patients. J Clin Periodontol 2018;45(6):721-32.
  17. Tahmaseb A, Wismeijer D, Coucke W, Derksen W. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29(suppl.):25-42.
  18. Van Assche N, Verccruyssen M, Coucke W, Teughels W, Jacobs R, Quirymen M. Accuracy of computer-aided implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23(suppl.6):112-23.
  19. Casseta M, Stefanelli L, Giansanti M, Di Mambro A, Colosso S. Accuracy of a computer-aided implant surgical technique. Int J Pediodontics Restorative Dent 2013;33(3):317-25.
  20. Somogyi-Ganss E, Holmes HI, Jokstad A. Accuracy of a novel prototype dynamic computer-assisted surgery system. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26(8):882-90.
  21. Varga Jr. E, Antal M, Major L, Kiscsatári R, Braunitzer G, Piffkó J. Guidance means accuracy: a randomized clinical trial on freehand versus guided dental implantation. Clinical Oral Implants Res 2020;31(5):417-30.
  22. Yimarj P, Subbalekha K, Dhanesuan K, Siriwatana K, Mattheos N, Pimkhaokham A. Comparison of the accuracy of implant position for two- implants supported fixed dental prosthesis using static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2020;22(6):672-8.
  23. Valente F, Schirolli G, Sbrenna A. Accuracy of computer-aided oral implant surgery: a clinical and radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24(2):234-42.
  24. Brief J, Edinger D, Hassfeld S, Eggers G. Accuracy of image-guided implantology. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16(4):495-501.
  25. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151(4):264-9.
  26. Floriani F, Lopes GC, Cabrera A, Duarte W, Zoidis P, Oliveira D et al. Linear accuracy of intraoral scanners for full-arch impressions of implant-supported prostheses: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Dent 2023;17(4):964-73.
  27. Krithikadatta J, Gopikrishna V, Datta M. CRIS Guidelines (Checklist for Reporting In-vitro Studies): a concept note on the need for standardized guidelines for improving quality and transparency in reporting in-vitro studies in experimental dental research. J Conserv Dent 2014;17(4):301-4.
  28. Jorba-Garcia A, Bara-Casaus JV, Camps-Font O, Sánchez-Garcés MA, Figueiredo R, Valmaseda-Castellón E. Accuracy of dental implant placement with or without the use of dynamic navigation assisted system: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res 2023;34(5):438-49.
  29. Arisan V, Karabuda ZC, Ozdemir T. Accuracy of two stereolithographic guide systems for computer-aided implant placement: a computed tomography-based clinical comparative study. J Periodontol 2010;81(1):43-51.
  30. Derksen W, Wismeijer D, Flügge T, Hassan B, Tahmaseb A. The accuracy of computer guided implant surgery with tooth supported, digitally designed drill guides based on CBCT and intraoral scanning. A prospective cohort study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2019;30(10):1005-15.
  31. Ewers R, Schicho K, Truppe M, Seemann R, Reichwein A, Figl M et al. Computer-aided navigation in dental implantology: 7 years of clinical experience. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;62(3):329-34.
Tags: , , ,