Premium
Accuracy of navigation‐guided socket drilling before implant installation compared to the conventional free‐hand method in a synthetic edentulous lower jaw model
Author(s) -
Hoffmann Jürgen,
Westendorff Carsten,
GomezRoman German,
Reinert Siegmar
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01153.x
Subject(s) - implant , absolute deviation , medicine , dentistry , orthodontics , biomedical engineering , nuclear medicine , surgery , mathematics , statistics
In this study, the three‐dimensional (3D) accuracy of navigation‐guided (NG) socket drilling before implant installation was compared to the conventional free‐hand (CF) method in a synthetic edentulous lower jaw model. The drillings were performed by two surgeons with different years of working experience. The inter‐individual outcome was assessed. NG drillings were performed using an optical computerized tomography (CT)‐based navigation system. CF drillings were performed using a surgical template. The coordinates of the drilled sockets were determined on the basis of CT scans. A total of n =224 drillings was evaluated. Inter‐individual differences in terms of the surgeons' years of work experience were without statistical significance. The mean deviation of the CF drilled sockets ( n =112) on the vestibulo‐oral and mesio‐distal direction was 11.2±5.6° (range: 4.1–25.3°). With respect to the NG drilled sockets ( n =112), the mean deviation was 4.2±1.8° (range: 2.3–11.5). The mean distance to the mandibular canal was 1.1±0.6 mm (range: 0.1–2.3 mm) for CF‐drilled sockets and 0.7±0.5 mm (range: 0.1–1.8 mm) for NG drilled sockets. The differences between the two methods were highly significant ( P <0.01). A potential benefit from image‐data‐based navigation in implant surgery is discussed against the background of cost‐effectiveness.