Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Aim: The main objective was to evaluate the accuracy of dynamic navigation-guided surgery (DNGS) for implant positioning performed by a novice operator. The secondary objectives were to analyze the operator's learning curve and identify possible complications deriving from the technique.
Materials And Methods: Twenty-five implants were placed in eight partially edentulous human heads. Preoperative CBCT scans were imported to planning software to determine the implant positions. Implants were placed using a dynamic navigation system. Postoperative CBCTs were superimposed onto the implant planning images. Discrepancies between the virtually planned implant positions and the postoperative positions were evaluated by measuring horizontal platform deviation, apex deviation, apicocoronal (vertical) deviation, and angular deviation.
Results: Mean platform, apex, vertical, and angle deviations were 1.55 ± 0.81 mm, 2.45 ± 0.84 mm, 1.59 ± 0.70 mm, and 5.56 ± 4.03 degrees, respectively. No significant differences were found between the maxilla and mandible or between anterior and posterior sites. A flat learning curve was observed, with the exception of the implant platform, where a tendency toward improvement in accuracy was observed between the 8th and the 17th implant placed. No complications were reported.
Conclusions: Based on the results of a study performed by a novice operator on a cadaveric model, DNGS allows accurate implant placement within a 2-mm safety margin in terms of implant platform and vertical positions, and a 3-mm margin in apical vicinities. The technique requires practice to learn the required eye-hand coordination. (Int J Comput Dent 2022;25(4):377-0; doi: 10.3290/j.ijcd.b2588207).
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.3290/j.ijcd.b2588207 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!