The Accuracy of Zygomatic Implant Placement Assisted by Dynamic Computer-Aided Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Shengchi Fan, Gustavo Sáenz-Ravello, Leonardo Diaz, Yiqun Wu, Rubén Davó, Feng Wang, Marko Magic, Bilal Al-Nawas, Peer W Kämmerer, Shengchi Fan, Gustavo Sáenz-Ravello, Leonardo Diaz, Yiqun Wu, Rubén Davó, Feng Wang, Marko Magic, Bilal Al-Nawas, Peer W Kämmerer
Abstract
Purpose: The present systematic review aimed to investigate the accuracy of zygomatic implant (ZI) placement using dynamic computer-aided surgery (d-CAIS), static computer-aided surgery (s-CAIS), and a free-hand approach in patients with severe atrophic edentulous maxilla and/or deficient maxilla.
Methods: Electronic and manual literature searches until May 2023 were performed in the PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. Clinical trials and cadaver studies were selected. The primary outcome was planned/placed deviation. Secondary outcomes were to evaluate the survival of ZI and surgical complications. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted and meta-regression was utilized to compare fiducial registration amounts for d-CAIS and the different designs of s-CAIS.
Results: A total of 14 studies with 511 ZIs were included (Nobel Biocare: 274, Southern Implant: 42, SIN Implant: 16, non-mentioned: 179). The pooled mean ZI deviations from the d-CAIS group were 1.81 mm (95% CI: 1.34-2.29) at the entry point and 2.95 mm (95% CI: 1.66-4.24) at the apex point, and angular deviations were 3.49 degrees (95% CI: 2.04-4.93). The pooled mean ZI deviations from the s-CAIS group were 1.19 mm (95% CI: 0.83-1.54) at the entry point and 1.80 mm (95% CI: 1.10-2.50) at the apex point, and angular deviations were 2.15 degrees (95% CI: 1.43-2.88). The pooled mean ZI deviations from the free-hand group were 2.04 mm (95% CI: 1.69-2.39) at the entry point and 3.23 mm (95% CI: 2.34-4.12) at the apex point, and angular deviations were 4.92 degrees (95% CI: 3.86-5.98). There was strong evidence of differences in the average entry, apex, and angular deviation between the navigation, surgical guide, and free-hand groups (p < 0.01). A significant inverse correlation was observed between the number of fiducial screws and the planned/placed deviation regarding entry, apex, and angular measurements.
Conclusion: Using d-CAIS and modified s-CAIS for ZI surgery has shown clinically acceptable outcomes regarding average entry, apex, and angular deviations. The maximal deviation values were predominantly observed in the conventional s-CAIS. Surgeons should be mindful of potential deviations and complications regardless of the decision making in different guide approaches.
Keywords: computer-aided surgery; edentulous; guided surgery; navigation; zygomatic implant.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures
References
- Brånemark P., Gröndahl K., Öhrnell L., Nilsson P., Petruson B., Svensson B., Engstrand P., Nannmark U. Zygoma fixture in the management of advanced atrophy of the maxilla: Technique and long-term results. Scand. J. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. Hand Surg. 2004;38:70–85. doi: 10.1080/02844310310023918.
- Chrcanovic B.R., Albrektsson T., Wennerberg A. Survival and Complications of Zygomatic Implants: An Updated Systematic Review. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2016;74:1949–1964. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2016.06.166.
- Davó R., Pons O. 5-year outcome of cross-arch prostheses supported by four immediately loaded zy-gomatic implants: A prospective case series. Eur. J. Oral. Implantol. 2015;8:169–174.
- Davó R., David L. Quad Zygoma: Technique and Realities. Oral. Maxillofac. Surg. Clin. N. Am. 2019;31:285–297. doi: 10.1016/j.coms.2018.12.006.
- Davo R., Malevez C., Rojas J. Immediate function in the atrophic maxilla using zygoma implants: A pre-liminary study. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2007;97((Suppl. 6)):S44–S51. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(07)60007-9.
- Kämmerer P.W., Fan S., Aparicio C., Bedrossian E., Davó R., Morton D., Raghoebar G.M., Zarrine S., Al-Nawas B. Evaluation of surgical techniques in survival rate and complications of zygomatic implants for the rehabilitation of the atrophic edentulous maxilla: A systematic review. Int. J. Implant. Dent. 2023;9:1–16. doi: 10.1186/s40729-023-00478-y.
- Vrielinck L., Moreno-Rabie C., Coucke W., Jacobs R., Politis C. Retrospective cohort assessment of survival and complications of zygomatic implants in atrophic maxillae. Clin. Oral Implant. Res. 2022;34:148–156. doi: 10.1111/clr.14027.
- Chrcanovic B.R., Oliveira D.R., Custódio A.L. Accuracy Evaluation of Computed Tomography–Derived Stereolithographic Surgical Guides in Zygomatic Implant Placement in Human Cadavers. J. Oral Implant. 2010;36:345–355. doi: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-09-00074.
- Chow J. A novel device for template-guided surgery of the zygomatic implants. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2016;45:1253–1255. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2016.06.007.
- Grecchi E., Stefanelli L., Grecchi F., Grivetto F., Franchina A., Pranno N. A novel guided zygomatic implant surgery system compared to free hand: A human cadaver study on accuracy. J. Dent. 2022;119:103942. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103942.
- Grecchi F., Stefanelli L.V., Grivetto F., Grecchi E., Siev R., Mazor Z., Del Fabbro M., Pranno N., Franchina A., Di Lucia V., et al. A Novel Guided Zygomatic and Pterygoid Implant Surgery System: A Human Cadaver Study on Accuracy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021;18:6142. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18116142.
- Bolzoni A.R., Zingari F., Gallo F., Goker F., Beretta P., Del Fabbro M., Mortellaro C., Grecchi F., Giannì A.B. Zygomatic implant guided rehabilitation based on inverted support technique: A pilot study. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2023;27:77–91. doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202304_31324.
- Vosselman N., Glas H.H., Merema B.J., Kraeima J., Reintsema H., Raghoebar G.M., Witjes M.J.H., de Visscher S.A.H.J. Three-Dimensional Guided Zygomatic Implant Placement after Maxillectomy. J. Pers. Med. 2022;12:588. doi: 10.3390/jpm12040588.
- Vosselman N., Glas H.H., de Visscher S.A.H.J., Kraeima J., Merema B.J., Reintsema H., Raghoebar G.M., Witjes M.J.H. Immediate implant-retained prosthetic obturation after maxillectomy based on zygomatic implant placement by 3D-guided surgery: A cadaver study. Int. J. Implant. Dent. 2021;7:1–8. doi: 10.1186/s40729-021-00335-w.
- Gallo F., Zingari F., Bolzoni A., Barone S., Giudice A. Accuracy of Zygomatic Implant Placement Using a Full Digital Planning and Custom-Made Bone-Supported Guide: A Retrospective Observational Cohort Study. Dent. J. 2023;11:123. doi: 10.3390/dj11050123.
- Wu Y., Wang F., Huang W., Fan S. Real-Time Navigation in Zygomatic Implant Placement. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. Clin. N. Am. 2019;31:357–367. doi: 10.1016/j.coms.2019.03.001.
- Watzinger F., Birkfellner W., Wanschitz F., Ziya F., Wagner A., Kremser J., Kainberger F., Huber K., Bergmann H., Ewers R. Placement of Endosteal Implants in the Zygoma after Maxillectomy: A Cadaver Study Using Surgical Navigation. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 2001;107:659–667. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200103000-00003.
- Wu Y., Wang F. Guided and Navigation Techniques for Zygomatic Implants. Atlas Oral Maxillofac. Surg. Clin. 2021;29:253–269. doi: 10.1016/j.cxom.2021.04.004.
- Wu Y., Tao B., Lan K., Shen Y., Huang W., Wang F. Reliability and accuracy of dynamic navigation for zygomatic implant placement. Clin. Oral Implant. Res. 2022;33:362–376. doi: 10.1111/clr.13897.
- Lopes A., de Araújo Nobre M., Santos D. The Workflow of a New Dynamic Navigation System for the Insertion of Dental Implants in the Rehabilitation of Edentulous Jaws: Report of Two Cases. J. Clin. Med. 2020;9:421. doi: 10.3390/jcm9020421.
- Wang C.I., Cho S.-H., Ivey A., Reddy L.V., Sinada N. Combined bone- and mucosa-supported 3D-printed guide for sinus slot preparation and prosthetically driven zygomatic implant placement. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2022;128:1165–1170. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.02.024.
- Schiroli G., Angiero F., Silvestrini-Biavati A., Benedicenti S. Zygomatic Implant Placement With Flapless Computer-Guided Surgery: A Proposed Clinical Protocol. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2011;69:2979–2989. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2011.03.050.
- Pellegrino G., Lizio G., Basile F., Stefanelli L.V., Marchetti C., Felice P. Dynamic Navigation for Zygomatic Implants: A Case Report about a Protocol with Intraoral Anchored Reference Tool and an Up-To-Date Review of the Available Protocols. Methods Protoc. 2020;3:75. doi: 10.3390/mps3040075.
- Ramezanzade S., Keyhan S.O., Tuminelli F.J., Fallahi H.R., Yousefi P., Lopez-Lopez J. Dynamic-Assisted Navigational System in Zygomatic Implant Surgery: A Qualitative and Quantitative Systematic Review of Current Clinical and Cadaver Studies. J. Oral. Maxillofac. Surg. 2021;79:799–812. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2020.10.009.
- Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D.G., PRISMA Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
- Landis J.R., Koch G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–174. doi: 10.2307/2529310.
- Sterne J.A.C., Savović J., Page M.J., Elbers R.G., Blencowe N.S., Boutron I., Cates C.J., Cheng H.Y., Corbett M.S., Eldridge S.M., et al. RoB 2: A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366:l4898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898.
- Sterne J.A.C., Hernán M.A., Reeves B.C., Savović J., Berkman N.D., Viswanathan M., Henry D., Altman D.G., Ansari M.T., Boutron I., et al. ROBINS-I: A tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i4919.
- Schünemann H.J., Cuello C., Akl E.A., Mustafa R.A., Meerpohl J.J., Thayer K., Morgan R.L., Gartlehner G., Kunz R., Katikireddi S.V., et al. GRADE guidelines: 18. How ROBINS-I and other tools to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies should be used to rate the certainty of a body of evidence. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2019;111:105–114. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.01.012.
- Balduzzi S., Rücker G., Schwarzer G. How to perform a meta-analysis with R: A practical tutorial. Ėvid. Based Ment. Health. 2019;22:153–160. doi: 10.1136/ebmental-2019-300117.
- Egger M., Davey-Smith G., Schneider M., Minder C. Bias in metaanalysis detected by a single, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629–634. doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629.
- Bhalerao A., Marimuthu M., Wahab A., Ayoub A. Dynamic navigation for zygomatic implant placement: A randomized clinical study comparing the flapless versus the conventional approach. J. Dent. 2023;130:104436. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104436.
- Guo H., Jiang X., Di P., Lin Y. A Novel Method to Achieve Preferable Bone-to-Implant Contact Area of Zygomatic Implants in Rehabilitation of Severely Atrophied Maxilla. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implant. 2023;38:111–119. doi: 10.11607/jomi.9824.
- Rinaldi M., Ganz S.D. Computer-Guided Approach for Placement of Zygomatic Implants: Novel Protocol and Surgical Guide. Compend. Contin. Educ. Dent. 2019;40:e1–e4.
- Schiroli G., Angiero F., Zangerl A., Benedicenti S., Ferrante F., Widmann G. Accuracy of a flapless protocol for computer-guided zygomatic implant placement in human cadavers: Expectations and reality. Int. J. Med. Robot. Comput. Assist. Surg. 2016;12:102–108. doi: 10.1002/rcs.1646.
- Van Steenberghe D., Malevez C., Van Cleynenbreugel J., Serhal C.B., Dhoore E., Schutyser F., Suetens P., Jacobs R. Accuracy of drilling guides for transfer from three-dimensional CT-based planning to placement of zygoma implants in human cadavers. Clin. Oral Implant. Res. 2003;14:131–136. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.140118.x.
- Gao B.X., Iglesias-Velázquez O., Tresguerres F.G., Cortes A.R.G., Tresguerres I.F., Aranegui R.O., López-Pintor R.M., López-Quiles J., Torres J. Accuracy of digital planning in zygomatic implants. Int. J. Implant. Dent. 2021;7:1–8. doi: 10.1186/s40729-021-00350-x.
- Aparicio C. A proposed classification for zygomatic implant patient based on the zygoma anatomy guided approach (ZAGA): A cross-sectional survey. Eur. J. Oral Implant. 2011;4:269–275.
- Davó R., Bankauskas S., Laurincikas R., Koçyigit I.D., Mate Sanchez de Val J.E. Clinical Performance of Zygomatic Implants—Retrospective Multicenter Study. J. Clin. Med. 2020;9:480. doi: 10.3390/jcm9020480.
- Cassetta M., Stefanelli L.V., Pacifici A., Pacifici L., Barbato E. How Accurate Is CBCT in Measuring Bone Density? A Comparative CBCT-CT In Vitro Study. Clin. Implant. Dent. Relat. Res. 2014;16:471–478. doi: 10.1111/cid.12027.
- Wang F., Bornstein M.M., Hung K., Fan S., Chen X., Huang W., Wu Y. Application of Real-Time Surgical Navigation for Zygomatic Implant Insertion in Patients With Severely Atrophic Maxilla. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2018;76:80–87. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2017.08.021.
- Enislidis G., Wagner A., Ploder O., Ewers R. Computed intraoperative navigation guidance—A preliminary report on a new technique. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 1997;35:271–274. doi: 10.1016/S0266-4356(97)90046-2.
- Fitzpatrick J., West J., Maurer C.R., Jr. Predicting error in rigid-body point-based registration. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging. 1998;17:694–702. doi: 10.1109/42.736021.
- Fan S., Hung K., Bornstein M., Huang W., Wang F., Wu Y. Effect of the Configurations of Fiducial Markers on the Accuracy of Surgical Navigation in Zygomatic Implant Placement: An In Vitro Study. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implant. 2019;34:85–90. doi: 10.11607/jomi.6821.
- Pérez A.S., Pastorino D., Aparicio C., Neyra M.P., Khan R.S., Wright S., Ucer C. Success Rates of Zygomatic Implants for the Rehabilitation of Severely Atrophic Maxilla: A Systematic Review. Dent. J. 2022;10:151. doi: 10.3390/dj10080151.
- Ramezanzade S., Yates J., Tuminelli F.J., Keyhan S.O., Yousefi P., Lopez-Lopez J. Zygomatic implants placed in atrophic maxilla: An overview of current systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Maxillofac. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 2021;43:1–15. doi: 10.1186/s40902-020-00286-z.
- Rueda J.R.G., Ávila I.G., Hermoso V.M.d.P., Deglow E.R., Zubizarreta-Macho Á., Mourelo J.P., Martín J.M., Montero S.H. Accuracy of a Computer-Aided Dynamic Navigation System in the Placement of Zygomatic Dental Implants: An In Vitro Study. J. Clin. Med. 2022;11:1436. doi: 10.3390/jcm11051436.
- Widmann G., Stoffner R., Bale R. Errors and error management in image-guided craniomaxillofacial surgery. Oral Surgery, Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endodontol. 2009;107:701–715. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.02.011.
- Tao B., Shen Y., Sun Y., Huang W., Wang F., Wu Y. Comparative accuracy of cone-beam CT and conventional multislice computed tomography for real-time navigation in zygomatic implant surgery. Clin. Implant. Dent. Relat. Res. 2020;22:747–755. doi: 10.1111/cid.12958.
- Kunzendorf B., Naujokat H., Wiltfang J. Indications for 3-D diagnostics and navigation in dental implantology with the focus on radiation exposure: A systematic review. Int. J. Implant. Dent. 2021;7:52. doi: 10.1186/s40729-021-00328-9.
- Fan S., Gielisch M.W., Díaz L., Thiem D.G., Al-Nawas B., Kämmerer P.W. Minimally Invasive Navigation-Guided Quad Zygomatic Implant Placement: A Comparative In Vitro Study. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implant. 2023;38:367–373. doi: 10.11607/jomi.10043.
Source: PubMed