scholarly journals A new inertial navigation system for guiding implant placement. An in-vitro proof-of-concept study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. e0255481
Author(s):  
G. Esteve-Pardo ◽  
L. Esteve-Colomina ◽  
E. Fernández

The aim of this study was to assess the potential use of a new advanced inertial navigation system for guiding dental implant placement and to compare this approach with standard stereolithographic template guiding. A movement processing unit with a 9-axis absolute orientation sensor was adapted to a surgical handpiece and wired to a computer navigation interface. Sixty implants were placed by 10 operators in 20 jaw models. The 30 implants of the test group were placed in 10 models guided by the new inertial navigation prototype. The 30 implants of the control group were placed in another 10 models using a CAD-CAM template. Both groups were subdivided into experienced and non-experienced operators. Pre- and postoperative computer tomography images were obtained and matched to compare the planned and final implant positions. Four deviation parameters (global, angular, depth, and lateral deviation) were defined and calculated. The primary outcome was the angular deviation between the standard stereolithographic approach and the new inertial navigation system. Results showed no significant differences between both groups, suggesting that surgical navigation based on inertial measurement units (IMUs) could potentially be useful for guiding dental implant placement. However, more studies are still needed to translate this new approach into clinical practice.

Author(s):  
Elçin Bedeloğlu ◽  
Mustafa Yalçın ◽  
Cenker Zeki Koyuncuoğlu

The purpose of this non-random retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the impact of prophylactic antibiotic on early outcomes including postoperative pain, swelling, bleeding and cyanosis in patients undergoing dental implant placement before prosthetic loading. Seventy-five patients (45 males, 30 females) whose dental implant placement were completed, included to the study. Patients used prophylactic antibiotics were defined as the experimental group and those who did not, were defined as the control group. The experimental group received 2 g amoxicillin + clavulanic acid 1 h preoperatively and 1 g amoxicillin + clavulanic acid twice a day for 5 days postoperatively while the control group had received no prophylactic antibiotic therapy perioperatively. Data on pain, swelling, bleeding, cyanosis, flap dehiscence, suppuration and implant failure were analyzed on postoperative days 2, 7, and 14 and week 12. No statistically significant difference was detected between the two groups with regard to pain and swelling on postoperative days 2, 7, and 14 and week 12 ( p >0.05), while the severity of pain and swelling were greater on day 2 compared to day 7 and 14 and week 12 in both groups ( p =0.001 and p <0.05, respectively). Similarly, no significant difference was found between the two groups with regard to postoperative bleeding and cyanosis. Although flap dehiscence was more severe on day 7 in the experimental group, no significant difference was found between the two groups with regard to the percentage of flap dehiscence assessed at other time points. Within limitations of the study, it has been demonstrated that antibiotic use has no effect on implant failure rates in dental implant surgery with a limited number of implants. We conclude that perioperative antibiotic use may not be required in straightforward implant placement procedures. Further randomized control clinical studies with higher numbers of patients and implants are needed to substantiate our findings.


2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (4) ◽  
pp. 336-341
Author(s):  
A. V. Rzhevskiy ◽  
O. V. Snigirev ◽  
Yu. V. Maslennikov ◽  
V. Yu. Slobodchikov

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document