Comparison of the accuracy of dental implant placement using dynamic and augmented reality-based dynamic navigation: An in vitro study

Baoxin Tao; Xingqi Fan; Feng Wang; Xiaojun Chen; Yihan Shen; Yiqun Wu

doi:10.1016/j.jds.2023.05.006

Comparison of the accuracy of dental implant placement using dynamic and augmented reality-based dynamic navigation: An in vitro study

J Dent Sci. 2024 Jan;19(1):196-202. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2023.05.006. Epub 2023 May 16.

Authors

Baoxin Tao^{1

2}, Xingqi Fan³, Feng Wang^{1

2}, Xiaojun Chen³, Yihan Shen^{1

2}, Yiqun Wu^{1

2}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Second Dental Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
² National Center for Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Shanghai Research Institute of Stomatology, Shanghai, China.
³ Institute of Biomedical Manufacturing and Life Quality Engineering, State Key Laboratory of Mechanical System and Vibration, School of Mechanical Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.

Abstract

Background/purpose: Augmented reality has been gradually applied in dental implant surgery. However, whether the dynamic navigation system integrated with augmented reality technology will further improve the accuracy is still unknown. The purpose of this study is to investigate the accuracy of dental implant placement using dynamic navigation and augmented reality-based dynamic navigation systems.

Materials and methods: Thirty-two cone-beam CT (CBCT) scans from clinical patients were collected and used to generate 64 phantoms that were allocated to the augmented reality-based dynamic navigation (ARDN) group or the conventional dynamic navigation (DN) group. The primary outcomes were global coronal, apical and angular deviations, and they were measured after image fusion. A linear mixed model with a random intercept was used. A P value < 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

Results: A total of 242 dental implants were placed in two groups. The global coronal, apical and angular deviations of the ARDN and DN groups were 1.31 ± 0.67 mm vs. 1.18 ± 0.59 mm, 1.36 ± 0.67 mm vs. 1.39 ± 0.55 mm, and 3.72 ± 2.13° vs. 3.1 ± 1.56°, respectively. No significant differences were found with regard to coronal and apical deviations (P = 0.16 and 0.6, respectively), but the DN group had a significantly lower angular deviation than the ARDN group (P = 0.02).

Conclusion: The augmented reality-based dynamic navigation system yielded a similar accuracy to the conventional dynamic navigation system for dental implant placement in coronal and apical points, but the augmented reality-based dynamic navigation system yielded a higher angular deviation.

Keywords: Augmented reality; Computer-assisted; Dental implants; Surgery.