Accuracy and efficiency of a calibration approach in dynamic navigation for implant placement: An in vitro study

Accuracy of bi-coordinate and multi-coordinate handpiece calibration methods for robot-assisted implant placement

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

To ensure accurate robot-assisted surgery, it is essential to identify the handpiece position at the end effector of the robotic arm. Clinically, the relationship between the optical tracking device and the handpiece has been typically confirmed by using a calibration plate at the end effector of the robotic arm. However, the accuracy of the handpiece calibration methods for robot-assisted implant placement remains unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of bi-coordinate and multi-coordinate handpiece calibration methods, as well as the multi-coordinate handpiece plate under partial obstruction, in the context of robot-assisted implant placement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In total, 120 implants were divided into 6 groups based on the calibration plate used in the study: bi-coordinate handpiece calibration plate for the maxilla (Bmx), bi-coordinate handpiece calibration plate for the mandible (Bmn), multi-coordinate handpiece calibration plate for the maxilla (Mmx), multi-coordinate handpiece calibration plate for the mandible (Mmn), partially obscured multi-coordinate handpiece calibration plate for the mandible with the primary coordinate unblocked and the auxiliary coordinate covered (MmnPrim), and partially obscured multi-coordinate handpiece calibration plate for the mandible with the auxiliary coordinate unblocked and the primary coordinate covered (MmnAux). Calibration of the robotic arm was conducted separately for each group. Then the robot autonomously performed osteotomies and implant placements at the first and second premolars according to the preoperative plan. Following surgery, the robotic software program calculated the deviation values between the planned and actual implant positions. Differences between the test groups were analyzed using 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Bonferroni post hoc test (α=.05).

RESULTS

The ranges of angular deviation and 3-dimensional deviations at the implant platform and apex across the 6 groups were 0.30 degrees to 0.48 degrees, 0.31 to 0.36 mm, and 0.31 to 0.38 mm, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found among the groups (P>.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both the bi-coordinate and multi-coordinate handpiece calibration methods demonstrated acceptable accuracy for robot-assisted implant placement. The multi-coordinate calibration plate provides a feasible method for robot calibration in scenarios where the mandible is partially obstructed.

Accuracy of a calibration method based on cone beam computed tomography and intraoral scanner data registration for robot-assisted implant placement: An in vitro study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Robotic systems have shown promise for implant placement because of their accuracy in identifying surgical positions. However, research on the accuracy of patient calibration methods based on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and intraoral scanner (IOS) data registration is lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to develop a calibration method based on the registration of CBCT and IOS data of a robot-assisted system for implant placement, evaluate the accuracy of this calibration method, and explore the accuracy of robot-assisted surgery at different implant positions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty standardized, polyurethane, partially edentulous maxillary typodonts were divided into 2 groups: one group used a calibration method based solely on CBCT data (CBCT group), and the other used a calibration method based on the registration of CBCT and IOS data (IOS group). Four implants were planned for each typodont in the right second premolar, left central incisor, left first premolar, and left second molar positions. The robot performed the osteotomies and implant placement step by step according to the preoperative plan. The operating software program automatically measured the deviation between the planned and actual implant position. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the least significant difference (LSD) post hoc test (α=.05) were used to analyze differences between the test groups.

RESULTS

The angular deviation and 3-dimensional deviations at implant platform and apex between the 2 calibration methods did not significantly differ among the 4 implant positions (P>.05). The horizontal and depth deviations at the implant platform and apex levels between the 2 calibration methods did not significantly differ among the 4 implant positions (P>.05). In the anterior region (left central incisor), the CBCT group showed higher horizontal deviation at both the implant platform and apex compared with the IOS group (P<.05). Conversely, the IOS group had greater depth deviation at both the implant platform and apex than the CBCT group (P<.05). In the posterior region, with or without distal extension (right second premolar, left first premolar, and left second molar), no statistically significant differences were found between the 2 calibration methods (P>.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The calibration method that was based on the registration of CBCT and IOS data demonstrated high accuracy. No significant differences in the accuracy of the calibration methods for robot-assisted implant placement were found between the CBCT group and IOS group.

The impacts of registration-and-fixation device positioning on the performance of implant placement assisted by dynamic computer-aided surgery: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of dynamic computer-aided surgery (dCAS) in replacing a single missing posterior tooth, we compare outcomes when using registration-and-fixation devices positioned anterior or posterior to the surgical site. Registration is performed on either the anterior or opposite posterior teeth.

METHODS

Forty individuals needing posterior single-tooth implant placement were randomly assigned to anterior or posterior registration. Nine parameters were analyzed to detect the deviations between planned and actual implant placement, using Mann-Whitney and t-tests for nonnormally and normally distributed data, respectively.

RESULTS

The overall average angular deviation for this study was 2.08 ± 1.12°, with the respective average 3D platform and apex deviations of 0.77 ± 0.32 mm and 0.88 ± 0.32 mm. Angular deviation values for individuals in the anterior and posterior registration groups were 1.58°(IQR: 0.98°-2.38°) and 2.25°(IQR: 1.46°-3.43°), respectively (p = .165), with 3D platform deviations of 0.81 ± 0.29 mm and 0.74 ± 0.36 mm (p = .464), as well as 3D apex deviations of 0.89 ± 0.32 mm and 0.88 ± 0.33 mm (p = .986). No significant variations in absolute buccolingual (platform, p = .659; apex, p = .063), apicocoronal (platform, p = .671; apex, p = .649), or mesiodistal (platform, p = .134; apex, p = .355) deviations were observed at either analyzed levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Both anterior and posterior registration approaches facilitate accurate dCAS-mediated implant placement for single missing posterior teeth. The device's placement (posterior-to or anterior-to the surgical site) did not affect the clinician's ability to achieve the planned implant location.

Impact of 3D imaging techniques and virtual patients on the accuracy of planning and surgical placement of dental implants: A systematic review

Aim

The integration of advanced technologies, including three-dimensional (3D) imaging modalities and virtual simulations, has significantly influenced contemporary approaches to preoperative planning in implant dentistry. Through a meticulous analysis of relevant studies, this review synthesizes findings related to accuracy outcomes in implant placement facilitated by 3D imaging in virtual patients.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted across relevant databases to identify relevant studies published to date. The inclusion criteria were studies utilizing 3D imaging techniques, virtual patients, and those focusing on the accuracy of dental implant planning and surgical placement. The selected studies were critically appraised for their methodological quality.

Results

After a rigorous analysis, 21 relevant articles were included out of 3021 articles. This study demonstrates the versatility and applicability of these technologies in both in vitro and in vivo settings. Integrating Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM), cone bean computed tomography (CBCT), and advanced 3D reconstruction methodologies showcases a trend toward enhanced precision in implant planning and placement. Notably, the evaluation parameters varied, encompassing distances, discrepancies, and deviations in the implant placement. The ongoing integration of systems such as dynamic navigation systems, augmented reality, and sophisticated software platforms shows a promising trajectory for the continued refinement of virtual reality applications in dental implantology, providing valuable insights for future research and clinical implementation. Moreover, using stereolithographic surgical guides, virtual planning with CBCT data, and 3D-printed templates consistently demonstrates enhanced precision in dental implant placement compared to traditional methods.

Conclusion

The synthesis of the available evidence underscores the substantial positive impact of 3D imaging techniques and virtual patients on dental implant planning and surgical placement accuracy. Utilizing these technologies contributes to a more personalized and precise approach that enhances overall treatment outcomes. Future research directions and potential refinements to the application of these technologies in clinical practice should be discussed.