固配二合一配准方法在动态导航种植中的精度和时间分析：一项体外研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8115.2024.11.010

上海交通大学学报（医学版） ›› 2024, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (11): 1433-1438.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8115.2024.11.010

• 论著 · 技术与方法 • 上一篇

固配二合一配准方法在动态导航种植中的精度和时间分析：一项体外研究

许敏(), 魏诗敏, 史俊宇, 赖红昌()

上海交通大学医学院附属第九人民医院口腔种植科，上海交通大学口腔医学院，国家口腔医学中心，国家口腔疾病临床医学研究中心，上海市口腔医学重点实验室，上海市口腔医学研究所，上海 200011

收稿日期:2024-04-25 接受日期:2024-06-18 出版日期:2024-11-28 发布日期:2024-11-28
通讯作者: 赖红昌 E-mail:2291895573@qq.com;lhc9@hotmail.com
作者简介:许　敏（1997—），女，硕士生；电子信箱：2291895573@qq.com。

Analysis of accuracy and time for the two-in-one navigation registration technique in dynamic navigation implantation: an in vitro study

XU Min(), WEI Shimin, SHI Junyu, LAI Hongchang()

Department of Dental Implantation, Shanghai Ninth People′s Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine; College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University; National Center for Stomatology; National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases; Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology; Shanghai Research Institute of Stomatology, Shanghai 200011, China

Received:2024-04-25 Accepted:2024-06-18 Online:2024-11-28 Published:2024-11-28
Contact: LAI Hongchang E-mail:2291895573@qq.com;lhc9@hotmail.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的·通过对比分析动态导航引导下固配二合一配准方式和U型管配准方式的种植精度和时间，评估固配二合一配准方式的精度和用时。方法·将30个下颌后牙单牙缺损的标准化3D打印模型随机分为3组：固配二合一配准组、U型管配准组及自由手种植组。通过易植美口腔种植手术导航系统设计种植手术方案，拍摄模型的术前及术后锥形束CT影像，测量各组种植体实际种植位置与设计种植位置的植入点误差、末端点误差和角度误差。记录不同配准方式进行配准操作的时间。基于单因素方差分析与SNK（Student-Newman-Keuls）检验对各组的植入点误差、末端点误差和角度误差3个指标进行统计学分析。结果·固配二合一配准组与U型管配准组在植入点误差、末端点误差及角度误差上差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）；固配二合一配准组及U型管配准组的植入点误差、末端点误差及角度误差均低于自由手种植组，差异均存在统计学意义（P<0.001）。固配二合一配准过程用时短于U型管配准过程用时，差异存在显著统计学意义（P<0.001）。结论·动态导航引导下在下颌后牙单牙缺失的模型上使用固配二合一的配准方式种植的精度与U型管配准方式种植的精度相似。固配二合一配准过程较U型管配准过程耗时更短，操作更便捷。

关键词: 固配二合一配准, U型管配准, 动态导航, 配准时间, 精度分析, 体外模型研究

Abstract:

Objective ·To assess the accuracy and time of the two-in-one registration technique by comparing it with the U-shaped tube registration in dynamic navigation implantation. Methods ·Thirty standardized 3D-printed models with mandibular posterior sites missing a single tooth were randomly divided into three groups: two-in-one registration group, U-shaped tube registration group and free-hand implantation group, and the implant surgical plan was designed by the “YIZHIMEI” DCARER oral implant surgery navigation system. Cone beam CT before and after operation was taken. The implant platform deviation, implant apex deviation and angular deviation of the actual implant positions and the designed implant positions were measured. The operating time for using two-in-one registration technique and the U-shaped tube registration technique was recorded to evaluate the complexity of the two registration techniques. The one-way ANOVA and SNK (Student-Newman-Keuls) test were used to analyze the implant platform deviation, implant apex deviation and angular deviation of each group. Results ·There were no statistically significant differences in implant platform deviation, implant apex deviation and angular deviation between the two-in-one registration group and the U-shaped tube registration group (P>0.05). However, the implant platform deviation, implant apex deviation and angular deviation of the two-in-one registration group and the U-shaped tube group were lower than those in the free-hand implantation group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.001). The operating time required for the two-in-one registration was shorter than that for the U-shaped tube registration process, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.001). Conclusion ·The accuracy of the two-in-one dynamic navigation registration technique used in implanting on a model of mandibular posterior sites missing a single tooth is similar to that of the U-shaped tube dynamic navigation registration technique. But the two-in-one registration takes less time for registration procedure than the U-shaped tube registration, and is easier to operate.

Key words: two-in-one registration technique, U-shaped tube registration technique, dynamic navigation, time for registration procedure, accuracy analysis, in vitro model study

中图分类号:

R782.12

许敏, 魏诗敏, 史俊宇, 赖红昌. 固配二合一配准方法在动态导航种植中的精度和时间分析：一项体外研究[J]. 上海交通大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 44(11): 1433-1438.

XU Min, WEI Shimin, SHI Junyu, LAI Hongchang. Analysis of accuracy and time for the two-in-one navigation registration technique in dynamic navigation implantation: an in vitro study[J]. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Medical Science), 2024, 44(11): 1433-1438.

图/表 4

图1 术前计划与术后CBCT影像的植入物偏差

Fig 1 Deviations between planned and actual implant positions

图2 固配二合一配准组、U型管配准组、自由手种植组的精度分析Note： A. The implant platform deviation. B. The implant apex deviation. C. The angular deviation.

Fig 2 Accuracy of the two-in-one registration group, U-shaped tube registration group and free-hand implantation group

图3 3D打印模型及动态导航系统Note： A. 3D-printed mandibular model with a single posterior tooth defect. B. A model equipped with U-shaped tube registration device. C. A model equipped with two-in-one registration device. D. An active infrared implant navigation system which can track and locate mobile phones and reference plates.

Fig 3 3D-printed models and dynamic navigation system

图4 固配二合一配准组和U型管配准组的配准用时

Fig 4 Registration time for two-in-one registration group and U-shaped tube registration group

参考文献 18

1	BEHNEKE A, BURWINKEL M, BEHNEKE N. Factors influencing transfer accuracy of cone beam CT-derived template-based implant placement[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2012, 23(4): 416-423.
2	WEI S M, ZHU Y, WEI J X, et al. Accuracy of dynamic navigation in implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2021, 32(4): 383-393.
3	EGGERS G, MÜHLING J, MARMULLA R. Image-to-patient registration techniques in head surgery[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2006, 35(12): 1081-1095.
4	FAN S C, HUNG K, BORNSTEIN M M, et al. The effect of the configurations of fiducial markers on accuracy of surgical navigation in zygomatic implant placement: an in vitro study[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2019, 34(1): 85-90.
5	WIDMANN G, ZANGERL A, SCHULLIAN P, et al. Do image modality and registration method influence the accuracy of craniofacial navigation?[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2012, 70(9): 2165-2173.
6	MA F F, SUN F, WEI T, et al. Comparison of the accuracy of two different dynamic navigation system registration methods for dental implant placement: a retrospective study[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2022, 24(3): 352-360.
7	WEI S M, SHI J Y, QIAO S C, et al. Accuracy and primary stability of tapered or straight implants placed into fresh extraction socket using dynamic navigation: a randomized controlled clinical trial[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2022, 26(3): 2733-2741.
8	WU B Z, SUN F. A registration-and-fixation approach with handpiece adjustment for dynamic navigation in dental implant surgery[J]. Heliyon, 2022, 8(9): e10565.
9	SIESSEGGER M, SCHNEIDER B T, MISCHKOWSKI R A, et al. Use of an image-guided navigation system in dental implant surgery in anatomically complex operation sites[J]. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2001, 29(5): 276-281.
10	EWERS R, SCHICHO K, TRUPPE M, et al. Computer-aided navigation in dental implantology: 7 years of clinical experience[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2004, 62(3): 329-334.
11	DE SOUZA A B, KANG M, NEGREIROS W M, et al. A comparative retrospective study of different surgical guide designs for static computer-assisted implant surgery in posterior single edentulous sites[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2022, 33(1): 45-52.
12	JORBA-GARCÍA A, GONZÁLEZ-BARNADAS A, CAMPS-FONT O, et al. Accuracy assessment of dynamic computer-aided implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2021, 25(5): 2479-2494.
13	BLOCK M, EMERY R, LANK K, et al. Implant placement accuracy using dynamic navigation[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2017, 32(1): 92-99.
14	WIDMANN G, BALE R J. Accuracy in computer-aided implant surgery: a review[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2017, 32(1): 92-99.
15	WIDMANN G, STOFFNER R, SCHULLIAN P, et al. Comparison of the accuracy of invasive and noninvasive registration methods for image-guided oral implant surgery[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2010, 25(3): 491-498.
16	GOLOB DEEB J, BENCHARIT S, CARRICO C K, et al. Exploring training dental implant placement using computer-guided implant navigation system for predoctoral students: a pilot study[J]. Eur J Dent Educ, 2019, 23(4): 415-423.
17	EMERY R W, MERRITT S A, LANK K, et al. Accuracy of dynamic navigation for dental implant placement-model-based evaluation[J]. J Oral Implantol, 2016, 42(5): 399-405.
18	JUNG R E, SCHNEIDER D, GANELES J, et al. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2009, 24(Suppl): 92-109.

固配二合一配准方法在动态导航种植中的精度和时间分析：一项体外研究

Analysis of accuracy and time for the two-in-one navigation registration technique in dynamic navigation implantation: an in vitro study

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 4

参考文献 18

相关文章 1

编辑推荐

Metrics