ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF DIGITAL SURGERY IN DENTAL REHABILITATION. LITERATURE REVIEW WITH A DESCRIPTION OF THE CLINICAL CASE
Abstract and keywords
Abstract (English):
Subject. With the advent of advanced imaging technology and CAD/CAM technologies, the possibility of guided surgery has become of wide interest among implantology. The article is devoted to the use of surgical template implantation in the rehabilitation of a dental patient. It provides information about some advantages and disadvantages of the digital protocol in comparison with traditional dental implantation. The main stages of navigation surgery in a clinical case are described. Goal. To evaluate the actual clinical advantages and disadvantages of dental implant placement using a surgical template compared to the traditional treatment protocol. Methodology. The literature search was conducted in scientific search bibliographic databases such as PubMed, eLIBRARY, Medline, and Google Academy. More than 384 studies up to 2014 were found under the thematic headings "Dental implantation" and "Surgical template". During the study of these works, the sample included 56 articles and literature reviews. Conclusions. Recently, implant placement using a surgical template has become a popular treatment method among dental surgeons. The study of modern literature allowed us to formulate the main advantages and disadvantages of this method. Advantages of the method: precise positioning of implants; flap-free surgery reduces the operation time and is characterized by a favorable postoperative course; integration of restoration determinants in surgical planning, which leads to a more aesthetic, functional and predictable result of prosthetics; the possibility of pre-manufacturing a prosthesis based on the planned position of the implant; simplification of the surgical procedure for the dentist. However, this method is not without its drawbacks: the surgeon's inability to visualize anatomical structures; the risk of axis and depth deviation during implant placement; requires additional digital planning.

Keywords:
guided surgery, dental implantation, surgical template, CAD/CAM prosthetics
References

1. Brief J., Edinger D., Hassfeld S., Eggers G. Accuracy of image-guided implantology // Clin Oral Implants Res. – 2005;16 (4):495-501. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01133.x

2. Tahmaseb A., Wismeijer D., Coucke W., Derksen W. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. – 2014;29:25-42.

3. Vercruyssen M., van de Wiele G., Teughels W., Naert I., Jacobs R., Quirynen M. Implant- and patient-centred outcomes of guided surgery, a 1-year follow-up: an RCT comparing guided surgery with conventional implant placement // J Clin Periodontol. – 2014;41 (12):1154-1160.

4. Pozzi A., Tallarico M., Marchetti M., Scarfò B., Esposito M. Computer-guided versus free-hand placement of immediately loaded dental implants: 1-year post-loading results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial // Eur J Oral Implantol. – 2014;7 (3):229-242.

5. Cassetta M., Giansanti M., Di Mambro A., Stefanelli L. V. Accuracy of positioning of implants inserted using a mucosa-supported stereolithographic surgical guide in the edentulous maxilla and mandible // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. – 2014;29 (5): 1071-1078.

6. Tahmaseb A., Wismeijer D., Coucke W., Derksen W. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. – 2014;29 (Suppl):25-42.

7. Mangano F., Gandolfi A., Luongo G., Logozzo S. Intraoral scanners in dentistry: A review of the current literature // BMC Oral Health. – 2017;17:149.

8. Tallarico M., Xhanari E., Cocchi F., Canullo L., Schipani F., Meloni S. M. Accuracy of computer-assisted template-based implant placement using a conventional impression and scan model or digital impression: A preliminary report from a randomized controlled trial // J. Oral Sci. Rehabil. – 2017;3:8-16.

9. Tallarico M., Esposito M., Xhanari E., Caneva M., Meloni S.M. Computer-guided vs freehand placement of immediately loaded dental implants: 5-year post- loading results of a randomised controlled trial // Eur. J. Oral Implantol. – 2018;11:203-213.

10. Sommacal B., Savic M., Filippi A., Kühl S., Thieringer F.M. Evaluation of Two 3D Printers for Guided Implant Surgery // Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. – 2018;33: 743-746.

11. Colombo M., Mangano C., Mijiritsky E., Krebs M., Hauschild U., Fortin T. Clinical applications and effectiveness of guided implant surgery: A critical review based on randomized controlled trials // BMC Oral Health. – 2017;17:150.

12. Meloni S. M., Tallarico M., Pisano M., Xhanari E., Canullo L. Immediate loading of fixed complete denture prosthesis supported by 4-8 implants placed using guided surgery: A 5 years prospective study on 66 patients with 356 implants // Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. – 2017;19:195-206.

13. Schneider D., Schober F., Grohmann P., Hammerle C. H., Jung R. E. In-vitro evaluation of the tolerance of surgical instruments in templates for computer-assisted guided implantology produced by 3-D printing // Clin. Oral Implants Res. – 2015;26: 320-325.

14. Ganz S. D. Three-dimensional imaging and guided surgery for dental implants // Dent Clin North Am. – 2015;59 (2):265-290.

15. Flügge T., Derksen W., Te Poel J., Hassan B., Nelson K., Wismeijer D. Registration of cone beam computed tomography data and intraoral surface scans - A prerequisite for guided implant surgery with CAD/CAM drilling guides // Clin Oral Implants Res. – 2017;28 (9):1113-1118.

16. Deeb G. R., Antonos L., Tack S. et al. Is cone beam computed technology always necessary for implant placement? // J Oral Maxillofac Surg. – 2017; 75 (2): 285-289.

17. Duello G. V. Intraoral scanning for single-tooth implant prosthetics: rationale for a digital protocol // Compend Contin Educ Dent. – 2018;39 (1):28-34.

18. Marghalani A., Weber Hy.-P., Finkelman M. et al. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for partially edentulous arches: an evaluation of accuracy // J Prosthet Dent. – 2018;119 (4):574-579.

19. Nedelcu R., Olsson P., Nystrom I. et al. Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: a novel in vivo analysis method // J Dent. – 2018;69:110-118.

20. Papaspyridakos P., Gallucci G. O., Chen C.-J. et al. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes // Clin Oral Implants Res. – 2016;27 (4):465-472.

21. Smeets R., Stadlinger B., Schwarz F., Beck-Broichsitter B., Jung O., Precht C., Kloss F., Gröbe A., Heiland M., Ebker T. Impact of dental implant surface modifications on Osseointegration // Biomed Res Int. – 2016;2016:6285620.

22. Vercruyssen M., van de Wiele G., Teughels W., Naert I., Jacobs R., Quirynen M. Implant- and patient-centred outcomes of guided surgery, a 1-year follow-up: an RCT comparing guided surgery with conventional implant placement // J Clin Periodontol. – 2014;41 (12):1154-1160.

23. Cassetta M., Giansanti M., Di Mambro A., Stefanelli L. V. Accuracy of positioning of implants inserted using a mucosa-supported stereolithographic surgical guide in the edentulous maxilla and mandible // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. – 2014;29(5):1071-1078.

24. Tahmaseb A., Wismeijer D., Coucke W., Derksen W. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review // Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. – 2014;29 (Suppl):25-42.

25. Grandi T., Guazzi P., Samarani R., Maghaireh H., Grandi G. One abutment-one time versus a provisional abutment in immediately loaded post-extractive single implants: a 1-year follow-up of a multicentre randomised controlled trial // Eur J Oral Implantol. – 2014;7 (2):141-149.

26. O'Connor Esteban M., Riad Deglow E., Zubizarreta-Macho Á., Hernández Montero S. Influence of the Digital Mock-Up and Experience on the Ability to Determine the Prosthetically Correct Dental Implant Position during Digital Planning: An In Vitro Study // J Clin Med. – 2019;9 (1):48.

27. Sun T. M., Lee H. E., Lan T. H. The influence of dental experience on a dental implant navigation system // BMC Oral Health. – 2019;19:222-233.

28. Tahmaseb A., Wu V., Wismeijer D., Coucke W., Evans C. The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis // Clin. Oral Implants Res. – 2018;16:416-435.

29. Fabbri G., Cannistraro G., Pulcini C., Sorrentino R. The full-mouth mock-up: A dynamic diagnostic approach (DDA) to test function and esthetics in complex rehabilitations with increased vertical dimension of occlusion // Int. J. Esthet. Dent. – 2018;13:460-474.

30. Schulz M. C., Hofmann F., Range U., Lauer G., Haim D. Pilot-drill guided vs. full-guided implant insertion in artificial mandibles—A prospective laboratory study in fifth-year dental students // Int. J. Implant Dent. – 2019;5:23-28.

31. Al Yafi F., Camenisch B., Al-Sabbagh M. Is Digital Guided Implant Surgery Accurate and Reliable? // Dent Clin North Am. – 2019;63 (3):381-397.

32. Oh J. H., An X., Jeong S. M., Choi B. H. Digital Workflow for Computer-Guided Implant Surgery in Edentulous Patients: A Case Report // J Oral Maxillofac Surg. – 2017;75 (12):2541-2549.

33. Stapleton B. M., Lin W. S., Ntounis A., Harris B. T., Morton D. Application of digital diagnostic impression, virtual planning, and computer-guided implant surgery for a CAD/CAM-fabricated, implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis: a clinical report // J Prosthet Dent. – 2014;112 (3):402-408.

34. Charette J. R., Goldberg J., Harris B. T., Morton D., Llop D. R., Lin W. S. Cone beam computed tomography imaging as a primary diagnostic tool for computer-guided surgery and CAD-CAM interim removable and fixed dental prostheses // J Prosthet Dent. – 2016;116 (2):157-165.

35. Arunyanak S. P., Harris B. T., Grant G. T., Morton D., Lin W. S. Digital approach to planning computer-guided surgery and immediate provisionalization in a partially edentulous patient // J Prosthet Dent. – 2016;116 (1):8-14.

36. Orentlicher G., Horowitz A., Kobren L. Computer-Guided Dental Implant Treatment of Complete Arch Restoration of Edentulous and Terminal Dentition Patients // Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. – 2019;31 (3):399-426.

37. Pozzi A., Arcuri L., Moy P. K. Temporary Shell Proof-of-Concept Technique: Digital-Assisted Workflow to Enable Customized Immediate Function in Two Visits in Partially Edentulous Patients // Compend Contin Educ Dent. – 2018;39 (3):e9-e12.

38. Pascual D., Vaysse J. Chirurgie implantaire et prothèse guidées et assistées par ordinateur : le flux numérique continu [Guided and computer-assisted implant surgery and prosthetic: The continuous digital workflow] // Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac Chir Orale. – 2016;117 (1):28-35.

39. Oh K. C., Jeon C., Park J. M., Shim J. S. Digital workflow to provide an immediate interim restoration after single-implant placement by using a surgical guide and a matrix-positioning device // J Prosthet Dent. – 2019;121 (1):17-21.

40. Joda T., Zarone F., Ferrari M. The complete digital workflow in fixed prosthodontics: a systematic review // BMC Oral Health. – 2017;19;17 (1):124.

41. Joda T., Brägger U. Time-efficiency analysis of the treatment with monolithic implant crowns in a digital workflow: a randomized controlled trial // Clin Oral Implants Res. – 2016;27 (11):1401-1406.

42. Joda T., Ferrari M., Brägger U. Monolithic implant-supported lithium disilicate (LS2) crowns in a complete digital workflow: A prospective clinical trial with a 2-year follow-up // Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. – 2017;19 (3):505-511.

43. Soardi C. M., Bramanti E., Cicciù M. Clinical and radiological 12-year follow-up of full arch maxilla prosthetic restoration supported by dental implants positioned through guide flapless surgery // Minerva Stomatol. – 2014;63 (3):85-94.

44. Edelhoff D., Schweiger J., Prandtner O., Stimmelmayr M., Güth J. F. Metal-free implant-supported single-tooth restorations. Part I: Abutments and cemented crowns // Quintessence Int. – 2019;50 (3):176-184.

45. Hassan B., Gimenez Gonzalez B., Tahmaseb A., Greven M., Wismeijer D. A digital approach integrating facial scanning in a CAD-CAM workflow for complete-mouth implant-supported rehabilitation of patients with edentulism: A pilot clinical study // J Prosthet Dent. – 2017;117 (4):486-492.

46. Papaspyridakos P., Ben Yehuda D., Rajput N., Weber H. P. Digital Workflow: From Guided Surgery to Final Full-Arch Implant Prosthesis in Three Visits // Compend Contin Educ Dent. – 2018;39 (7):e1-e4.

47. Benic G. I., Elmasry M., Hämmerle C. H. Novel digital imaging techniques to assess the outcome in oral rehabilitation with dental implants: a narrative review // Clin Oral Implants Res. – 2015;26 Suppl 11:86-96.

48. Rios H. F., Borgnakke W. S., Benavides E. The Use of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in Management of Patients Requiring Dental Implants: An American Academy of Periodontology Best Evidence Review // J Periodontol. – 2017;88 (10):946-959.

49. Smitkarn P., Subbalekha K., Mattheos N., Pimkhaokham A. The accuracy of single-tooth implants placed using fully digital-guided surgery and freehand implant surgery // J Clin Periodontol. – 2019;46 (9):949-957.

50. Tan P. L. B., Layton D. M., Wise S. L. In vitro comparison of guided versus freehand implant placement: use of a new combined TRIOS surface scanning, Implant Studio, CBCT, and stereolithographic virtually planned and guided technique // Int J Comput Dent. – 2018;21 (2):87-95.

51. Bencharit S., Staffen A., Yeung M., Whitley D. 3rd, Laskin D. M., Deeb G. R. In Vivo Tooth-Supported Implant Surgical Guides Fabricated With Desktop Stereolithographic Printers: Fully Guided Surgery Is More Accurate Than Partially Guided Surgery // J Oral Maxillofac Surg. – 2018;76 (7):1431-1439.

52. Deeb G. R., Allen R. K., Hall V. P., Whitley D. 3rd, Laskin D. M., Bencharit S. How Accurate Are Implant Surgical Guides Produced With Desktop Stereolithographic 3-Dimentional Printers? // J Oral Maxillofac Surg. – 2017;75 (12):2559.e1-2559.e8.

53. Mandelaris G. A., Stefanelli L. V., DeGroot B. S. Dynamic Navigation for Surgical Implant Placement: Overview of Technology, Key Concepts, and a Case Report // Compend Contin Educ Dent. – 2018;39 (9):614-621; quiz 622.

54. Pellegrino G., Mangano C., Mangano R., Ferri A., Taraschi V., Marchetti C. Augmented reality for dental implantology: a pilot clinical report of two cases // BMC Oral Health. – 2019;19;19 (1):158.

55. Ayoub A., Pulijala Y. The application of virtual reality and augmented reality in Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery // BMC Oral Health. – 2019;8;19 (1):238.

56. Kaewsiri D., Panmekiate S., Subbalekha K., Mattheos N., Pimkhaokham A. The accuracy of static vs. dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in single tooth space: A randomized controlled trial // Clin Oral Implants Res. – 2019;30 (6):505-514.