Accuracy Of Implant Placement Research Articles

The effect on the performance of a dynamic navigation system of superimposing a standard tessellation language (STL) file obtained with an intraoral scan on a cone beam computer tomograph (CBCT). An experimental in vitro study

ObjectivesTo compare the accuracy and operative time of implant placement using a dynamic computer assisted implant surgery (dCAIS) system based on a cone beam computer tomography (CBCT) image, with and without superimposing a standard tessellation language (STL) file of an intraoral scan of the patient. MethodsTen identical resin models simulating an upper maxilla with posterior edentulism were assigned to two groups. In the CBCT+STL group, a CBCT file and an intraoral STL file were superimposed and used for registration; in the CBCT group, registration was performed using CBCT images. Six implants were placed in each model using the Navident® dynamic navigation system. Anatomy registration was performed by tracing fiducial points on the CBCT or STL image, depending on the group. Preoperative and postoperative CBCT images were overlaid to assess implant placement accuracy. ResultsSixty implants were analyzed (30 implants in each group). 3D platform deviation was significantly lower (mean difference (MD): 0.17 mm; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.01 to 0.23; P = 0.039) in the CBCT+STL group (mean: 0.71 mm; standard deviation (SD): 0.29) than in the CBCT group (mean: 0.88 mm; SD: 0.39). The remaining accuracy outcome variables (angular deviation MD: -0.01; platform lateral deviation MD: 0.08 mm; apex global MD: 0.01 mm; apex depth MD: 0.33 mm) and surgery time (MD: 3.383 min.) were similar in both groups (p > 0.05). ConclusionsThe introduction of an intraoral scan (STL) seems to reduce deviations slightly in dental implant placement with dCAIS systems. However, the clinical repercussion of this improvement is questionable. Clinical significanceSuperimposing an intraoral scan on the CBCT image does not seem to increase the accuracy of dCAIS systems but can be useful when radiographic artifacts are present.

A Staged Digital Protocol for the Terminal Dentition for Immediate Loading using a Provi-guide.

This report describes a step-by-step stagged digital protocol for the terminal dentition patient using a Provi-guide. This protocol will improve implant placement accuracy, shorten treatment time, and assure an implant-supported fixed complete denture immediately loaded after extraction of the remaining terminal dentition and complete edentulism. The novelty of the Provi-guide technique described is that it serves two objectives: 1. a non-limiting surgical guide, and 2. a fixed interim prosthesis. Implants placed in the described digital stagged protocol can serve both the interim and the final prosthesis.

Computed tomography assessment of robotic versus fluoroscopic implant accuracy in sacroiliac joint fusion.

Computed tomography is considered the gold-standard imaging tool to evaluate spinal implant accuracy. However, there are no studies that evaluate the accuracy of robotic sacroiliac joint (SIJ) implant placement using CT to date. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of implant placement on CT between robotic and fluoroscopic navigation for SIJ fusion and the subsequent complications and clinical outcomes of suboptimally placed screws. A retrospective analysis of SIJ fusions utilizing either robotic or fluoroscopic guidance at a single institution was conducted from 2014 to 2023. Implant placement accuracy was evaluated on intra- or postoperative CT. Primary endpoints were SIJ screw placement accuracy and complications. Secondary endpoints were pain status at the first and second follow-ups and rates of 2-year revision surgery. Statistical analysis was performed using chi-square tests. Sixty-nine patients who underwent 78 SIJ fusions were included, of which 63 were robotic and 15 were fluoroscopic. The mean age of the cohort at the time of surgery was 55.9 ± 14.2 years, and 35 patients (50.7%) were female. There were 135 robotically placed and 34 fluoroscopically placed implants. A significant difference was found in implant placement accuracy between robotic and fluoroscopic fusion (97.8% vs 76.5%, p < 0.001). When comparing optimal versus suboptimal implant placement, no difference was found in the presence of 30-day complications (p = 0.98). No intraoperative complications were present in this cohort. No difference was found in subjective pain status at the first (p = 0.69) and second (p = 0.45) follow-ups between optimal and suboptimal implant placement. No patients underwent 2-year revision surgery. Use of robotic navigation was significantly more accurate than the use of fluoroscopic navigation for SIJ implant placement. Complications overall were low and not different between optimally and suboptimally placed implants. Suboptimally placed implants did not differ in degree of subjective pain improvement or rates of revision surgery postoperatively.

Reliability and accuracy of intraoperative fluoroscopy assessment of acetabular cup anteversion in supine direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty

Poor implantation positioning of hip prostheses is considered the primary factor affecting postoperative joint wear. Cup anteversion in direct anterior approach (DAA) total hip arthroplasty (THA) is often excessive. Intraoperative fluoroscopy (IF) are effective for improving implant placement accuracy. This study aimed to analyze IF’s reliability and accuracy in assessing intraoperative anteversion. Sixty-two consecutive hips underwent primary THA utilizing DAA alongside IF for cup placement. Intraoperative anteversion was measured using IF images, while postoperative CT and standard anteroposterior (AP) radiographs were used to calculate true anteversion component angles. Differences and correlations between intraoperative and true anteversions were analyzed, and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) determined the inter- and intra-observer reliabilities. Excellent intra- and inter-observer reliabilities were observed for all radiographic and CT methods (ICC > 0.9). Strong correlations (PCC > 0.6) existed between anteversion measured on IF image and postoperative CT and AP pelvic measurements. Intraoperative anteversion measured on IF images (16.8 ± 3.2°) was smaller than anteversion measured postoperatively on AP X-rays (21.3 ± 4.7°, P < 0.001) and CT (22.0 ± 4.9°, P < 0.001), with average differences of 4.5°and 5.3°, respectively. Under several influencing factors, the accuracy of IF in assessing cup anteversion in DAA-THA may be limited. However, this still requires large-sample experiments for verification.

The influence of radiographic marker registration versus a markerless trace registration method on the implant placement accuracy achieved by dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery. An in-vitro study

ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the effect the radiographic marker registration (RMR) and markerless tracing registration (MTR) on implant placement accuracy using a dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery system (dCAIS). Additionally, this study aimed to assess the surgical time and whether the implant location influences the accuracy of the two registration methods. Methods136 dental implants were randomly allocated to the RMR or MTR group and were placed with a dCAIS in resin models. Preoperative and postoperative Cone Beam Computer Tomograms (CBCT) were overlaid and implant placement accuracy was assessed. Descriptive and multivariate analysis of the data was performed. ResultsSignificant differences (P < 0.001) were found for all accuracy variables except angular deviation (RMR:4.30° (SD:4.37°); MTR:3.89° (SD:3.32°)). The RMR had a mean 3D platform deviation of 1.53 mm (SD:0.98 mm) and mean apex 3D deviation of 1.63 mm (SD:1.05 mm) while the MTR had lower values (0.83 mm (SD:0.67 mm) and 1.07 mm (SD:0.86 mm), respectively). In the MTR group, implant placement in the anterior mandible was more accurate (p < 0.05). Additionally, MTR did not significantly increase the surgical time compared with RMR (P = 0.489). ConclusionsMTR seems to increase the accuracy of implant placement using dCAIS in comparison with the RMR method, without increasing the surgical time. The operated area seems to be relevant and might influence the implant deviations. Clinical significanceConsidering the limitations of this in-vitro study, MTR seems to provide a higher accuracy in implant placement using dCAIS without increasing the surgical time. Furthermore, this method does not require radiographic markers and allows re-registration during surgery.

Evaluation of the Impact of Digital Dentistry on the Precision of Implant Placement and Prosthesis Fabrication: An In-Vitro Study.

Digital dentistry has revolutionized the field of implant dentistry, offering enhanced accuracy and precision in implant placement and prosthesis fabrication. This study aims to evaluate the effect of digital dentistry on the accuracy of implant placement and prosthesis fit through a comprehensive in-vitro assessment. In this in-vitro study, a Digital Dentistry Group and a Conventional Group were compared regarding implant placement accuracy and prosthesis fit. Measurements of coronal deviation, apical deviation, global deviation, angulation deviation, and depth deviation were obtained for implant placement accuracy, while marginal fit and internal fit were assessed for prosthesis fit. Statistical analysis was performed to determine significant differences between the two groups. The Digital Dentistry Group demonstrated significantly lower values of coronal deviation, apical deviation, global deviation, angulation deviation, and depth deviation compared to the Conventional Group (p < 0.001). Similarly, the Digital Dentistry Group exhibited superior marginal fit and internal fit (p < 0.001) when compared to the Conventional Group. This in-vitro study provides evidence supporting the superior accuracy of implant placement and improved prosthesis fit achieved through digital dentistry techniques. The use of intraoral scanners, computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) systems, and three-dimensional (3D) imaging enables precise digital impressions, virtual planning, and custom-made prostheses with superior fit and esthetics. Incorporating digital dentistry into clinical practice can enhance treatment outcomes and patient satisfaction in implant dentistry.

Accuracy of implant placement using a mixed reality-based dynamic navigation system versus static computer-assisted and freehand surgery: An in Vitro study

PurposeThis in vitro study aimed to compare the accuracy of dental implant placement in partially edentulous maxillary models using a mixed reality-based dynamic navigation (MR-DN) system to conventional static computer-assisted implant surgery (s-CAIS) and a freehand (FH) method. MethodsForty-five partially edentulous models (with teeth missing in positions #15, #16 and #25) were assigned to three groups (15 per group). The same experienced operator performed the model surgeries using an MR-DN system (group 1), s-CAIS (group 2) and FH (group 3). In total, 135 dental implants were placed (45 per group). The primary outcomes were the linear coronal deviation (entry error; En), apical deviation (apex error; Ap), XY and Z deviations, and angular deviation (An) between the planned and actual (post-surgery) position of the implants in the models. These deviations were computed as the distances between the stereolithographic (STL) files for the planned implants and placed implants captured with an intraoral scanner. ResultsAcross the three implant sites, the MR-DN system was significantly more accurate than the FH method (in XY, Z, En, Ap and An) and s-CAIS (in Z, Ap and An), respectively. However, S-CAIS was more accurate than MR-DN in XY, and no difference was found between MR-DN and s-CAIS in En. ConclusionsWithin the limits of this study (in vitro design, only partially edentulous models), implant placement accuracy with MR-DN was superior to that of FH and similar to that of s-CAIS. Statement of Clinical RelevanceIn vitro, MR-DN showed greater accuracy in implant positioning than FH, and similar accuracy to s-CAIS: it could, therefore, represent a new option for the surgeon. However, clinical studies are needed to determine the feasibility of MR-DN.

The precision of drill calibration for dynamic navigation

ObjectivesTo quantify the reproducibility of the drill calibration process in dynamic navigation guided placement of dental implants and to identify the human factors that could affect the precision of this process in order to improve the overall implant placement accuracy. MethodsA set of six drills and four implants were calibrated by three operators following the standard calibration process of NaviDent® (ClaroNav Inc.). The reproducibility of the position of each tip of a drill or implant was calculated in relation to the pre-planned implants’ entry and apex positions. Intra- and inter-operator reliabilities were reported. The effects of the drill length and shape on the reproducibility of the calibration process were also investigated. The outcome measures for reproducibility were expressed in terms of variability range, average and maximum deviations from the mean distance. ResultsA satisfactory inter-rater reproducibility was noted. The precision of the calibration of the tip position in terms of variability range was between 0.3 and 3.7 mm. We noted a tendency towards a higher precision of the calibration process with longer drills. More calibration errors were observed when calibrating long zygomatic implants with non-locking adapters than with pointed drills. Flexible long-pointed drills had low calibration precision that was comparable to the non-flexible short-pointed drills. ConclusionThe clinicians should be aware of the calibration error associated with the dynamic navigation placement of dental and zygomatic implants. This should be taken in consideration especially for long implants, short drills, and long drills that have some degree of flexibility. Clinical significanceDynamic navigation procedures are associated with an inherent drill calibration error. The manual stability during the calibration process is crucial in minimising this error. In addition, the clinician must never ignore the prescribed accuracy checking procedures after each calibration process.

Use of Computed Tomography for Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

IntroductionThe prevalence of total shoulder arthroplasties is on the rise annually. Improvements in implant quality, construct stability, and surgical techniques have notably enhanced post-operative results, prompting an expansion of indications for shoulder arthroplasty. Despite its high success rate, opportunities for enhancement remain, especially in preoperative planning and intraoperative execution. Advanced imaging technologies offer significant potential in optimizing implant placement, thus improving the longevity of the procedure. To our knowledge, a comprehensive review examining the impact of advanced imaging on shoulder arthroplasty has yet to be conducted. This systematic review aims to investigate the benefits of advanced imaging technologies in this context, focusing on their application in preoperative planning, osteoarthritis assessment, intraoperative adjustments, patient-specific instrumentation, and navigational aids. MethodsThis review utilized a comprehensive search of PubMed to identify relevant studies published from 2000 to 2024, focusing on the application of various imaging techniques in shoulder arthroplasty. The search was conducted by two authors and centered on plain radiography, CT scans, and MRI. The selection criteria included availability of full-text articles, English language, direct comparison of imaging techniques, and a focus on patient outcomes, including discussions on broader applications such as intraoperative navigation and patient-specific instrumentation development. ResultsEnhanced imaging techniques, particularly CT scans and MRIs, have been shown to significantly improve outcomes in shoulder arthroplasty. While plain radiographs remain standard, CT scans provide superior bony detail, crucial for evaluating glenoid wear and determining augmentation needs. Preoperative CT imaging has been demonstrated to enhance implant placement accuracy. Moreover, intraoperative technologies based on CT imaging, such as patient-specific instrumentation and navigation systems, contribute to better surgical results. ConclusionThe benefits of CT imaging in shoulder arthroplasty significantly outweigh the associated costs. Current literature strongly supports the adoption of CT imaging in these procedures, particularly when used alongside modern operative technologies.

Accuracy of flapless surgery using an autonomous robotic system in full-arch immediate implant restoration: A case series

ObjectivesThis observational study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) for full-arch immediate restoration and to analyse possible factors contributing to deviations. MethodsThree edentulous patients (five arches) underwent r-CAIS. Osteotomies were performed using an autonomous robot under the surgeon's supervision, and implant placement was performed in a freehand or robotic manner. Prefabricated provisional prostheses were delivered immediately after surgery. Postoperative cone beam computed tomography scans were performed to assess the deviations between the planned and placed implants. Statistics were compared with deviations of s-CAIS outlined in a meta-analysis. ResultsA sum of 28 implants were used. The mean global coronal and apical deviations measured 0.91 ± 0.43 mm and 1.01 ± 0.45 mm, respectively, and the mean angular deviation measured 1.21 ± 1.24 º. The r-CAIS showed significantly better precision than the s-CAIS in full-arch cases (P < 0.001). The implants inserted using the robotic arm exhibited fewer deviations than those placed in the freehand manner. Eighty percent of prefabricated provisional prostheses were successfully delivered. ConclusionsWithin the limitations of the present study, our data suggest that autonomous r-CAIS is a feasible approach for simultaneous immediate restoration in edentulous patients, showing better accuracy than s-CAIS. Further large-scale studies are necessary to verify the advantages and disadvantages of this novel technique and to explore possible factors that influence its accuracy. Clinical SignificanceAutonomous r-CAIS can provide clinically acceptable implant placement accuracy in edentulous patients, significantly surpassing s-CAIS. This level of accuracy may represent a viable therapeutic approach for simultaneous immediate full-arch restoration.

Simultaneous Evaluation of Bone Cut and Implant Placement Accuracy in Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of bone cuts and implant placements, simultaneously, for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed using a system with an active robotic arm. Methods: Two experienced orthopaedic surgeons performed TKA on ten cadaveric legs. Computed tomography scans were performed to compare the bone cuts and implant placements with the preoperative planning. The differences between the planned and actual bone cuts and implant placements were assessed using positional and angular errors in the three anatomical planes. Additionally, the cut-implant deviations were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed to detect systematic errors in the bone cuts and implant placements and to quantify the correlations between these errors. Results: The root-mean-square (RMS) errors of the bone cuts (with respect to the planning) were between 0.7-1.5 mm and 0.6-1.7°. The RMS implant placement errors (with respect to the planning) varied between 0.6-1.6 mm and 0.4-1.5°, except for the femur and tibia in the sagittal plane (2.9°). Systematic errors in the bone cuts and implant placements were observed, respectively, in three and two degrees of freedom. For cut-implant deviations, the RMS values ranged between 0.3-2.0 mm and 0.6-1.9°. The bone cut and implant placement errors were significantly correlated in eight degrees-of-freedom (ρ ≥ 0.67, p < 0.05). Conclusions: With most of the errors below 2 mm or 2°, this study supported the value of active robotic TKA in achieving accurate bone cuts and implant placements. The findings also highlighted the need for both accurate bone cuts and proper implantation technique to achieve accurate implant placements.

Analyzing Linear and Angular Deviations After Guided Surgery for Dental Implant Placement: A Preliminary Study.

This study aimed to assess the accuracy and precision of prosthetically-driven implant placement achieved through static computer-aided implant surgery. The primary objective was to analyze the linear and angular deviations of dental implants in patients treated at a university dental clinic. Various types of surgical techniques and templates were utilized to optimize implant positioning. A total of fiftythree dental implants were included in this study. The implants were positioned using either tooth-supported templates or tooth-tissue-supported templates with fixation pins. Two distinct guided surgery approaches were used, these being pilot drill guided and fully guided. Three-dimensional (3D) data from the implant planning phase was superimposed with the 3D data from the final implant positions using the 'Treatment Evaluation' tool within CoDiagnostix. implant planning software (Straumann AG). This enabled the automatic calculation of deviations in implant placement accuracy. Average angular deviation observed was 3.90 degrees. For linear deviations, the mean 3D deviation at the most coronal point of the implants was 1.04 mm, while at the implant apex it was 1.56 mm. This research demonstrates the feasibility of a digital workflow for guided implant surgery, offering a promising treatment option. Nonetheless, it is important to note that deviations do occur, with the apical region of the implant being the most affected area. Care should be taken, particularly in cases of limited bone availability.

A literature review on prosthetically designed guided implant placement and the factors influencing dental implant success

This is an extensive review of the literature on prosthetically designed implant planning with particular regard to the factors influencing dental implant success. Electronic searches on PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and manual searches were performed. The author selected the studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of implant placement accuracy and a qualitative review of potential influencing factors were performed.This literature review will explore prosthetically designed implant placement and its influence on dental implant success. By examining the factors that impact implant outcomes, this review aims to provide clinicians with a comprehensive understanding of the key considerations and best practices in achieving successful implant placements. Ultimately, this knowledge can contribute to enhancing patient care and the long-term success of dental implant treatments.

A Bibliometric Analysis: The Application of Robotic Technology in Spine Surgery in the Past 30 Years

Purpose: The aim of this study is to comprehensively analyze the application of robotic technology in spine surgery and display the current research status in this field. Methods: To investigate the distribution and characteristics of robotics in spinal surgery, the publications in PubMed and web of science was examined and analyzed. We utilized CiteSpace and VOSviewer to review and visualize academic literature from the previous 30 years on the use of robotic technology in spine surgery. Results: According to the findings of the research, it indicates that robotics is becoming more widespread in spine surgery, with robotics playing an important role in pedicle screw placement, intraoperative navigation, imaging guidance, and minimizing radiation exposure for surgeons and surgical teams. how to establish a set of standards, how to reduce personnel radiation exposure in the operating room, postoperative follow-up between traditional and robotic surgery, and the prognosis and incidence of complications such as spondylosis, and so on are all topics that will be discussed. Conclusion: The study looked into the recovery time following robotic surgery, the expense of hospitalization, the robotic technology in terms of time during surgical procedures, blood loss, and implant placement accuracy, which are all topics that will be investigated more in the future. While there are some discrepancies in government, physician, and patient views, expectations, and clinical data for robotic surgery, robots will increasingly be used in areas that demand great precision. The application of robotic technology in spine surgery will be extensive.

The influence of guide stabilizers and their application sequences on trueness and precision of surgical guides in free end situations: An invitro analysis.

To evaluate the impact of guide stabilizers and their application sequences on implant placement accuracy of guided implant surgery in multiple teeth loss at free end. In this study, 96 implants were placed in the regions of #34, #36, and #37 of 32 identical mandibular models. The influence of using guide stabilizers or not (group A and group B) and various guide stabilizers application sequences (group B: #34 → #36 → #37; group C: #36 → #34 → #37; group D: #37 → #34 → #36) on implant placement trueness and precision was investigated. Data were analyzed using T-tests and one-way ANOVA. Group B showed significant benefits in enhancing implant placement precision. Compared to group A, it resulted in reducing 3D-deviation at crest and 2D deviation in vestibular-oral direction at both crest and apex. Furthermore, group D demonstrated greater improvement in global implant placement precision by reducing 2D deviation in mesial-distal direction at both crest and apex. Among the three different stabilizer application sequences, group D exhibited the highest level of implant placement precision. In cases of missing teeth at distal free end, the use of guide stabilizers and their application sequences does not have a significant impact on implant placement trueness. However, they do improve implant placement precision compared to methods that do not utilize guide stabilizers. Specifically, applying a guide stabilizer first at the furthest implant site to change teeth loss classification from free end to edentulous space with posterior support is the most reliable sequence.

Accuracy of a novel modified single computed tomography scanning method for assisting dental implant placement: a retrospective observational study

PurposeThe aim of this study is to compare dental implant placement accuracy of three surgical guide fabrication methods: single (SCT) and double computed tomography (DCT), and a newly developed modified SCT (MSCT) scan method.MethodsA total of 183 cases (183 surgical guides, and 485 implants) of static-guide-assisted implant placement surgery using the SCT, DCT, or MSCT methods in a dental clinic were included in the study. Three-dimensional (3D) deviations (mm) at the entry and tip of the implant body between preoperative simulation and actual placement were measured as surrogate endpoints of implant placement accuracy. The following survey details were collected from medical records and CT data: sex, age at implant placement surgery, surgical guide fabrication method, number of remaining teeth, implant length, implant location, alveolar bone quality, and bone surface inclination at implant placement site in preoperative simulation, etc. Risk factors for reducing implant placement accuracy were investigated using generalized estimating equations.ResultsThe SCT and DCT methods (odds ratios [ORs] vs. MSCT method: 1.438, 1.178, respectively), posterior location (OR: 1.114), bone surface buccolingual inclination (OR: 0.997), and age at implant placement surgery (OR: 0.995) were significant risk factors for larger 3D deviation at the entry; the SCT (OR: 1.361) and DCT methods (OR: 1.418), posterior location (OR: 1.190), implant length (OR: 1.051), and age at implant placement surgery (OR: 0.995) were significant risk factors for larger 3D deviation at the tip of the implant body.ConclusionsImplant placement accuracy was better using the MSCT method compared to the SCT and DCT methods.

Patient-Specific 3D Virtual Surgical Planning Using Simulated Fluoroscopic Images to Improve Sacroiliac Joint Fusion

Sacroiliac (SI) joint dysfunction can lead to debilitating pain but can be treated with minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion (SIJF). This treatment is commonly performed using 2D fluoroscopic guidance. This makes placing the implants without damaging surrounding neural structures challenging. Virtual surgical planning (VSP) using simulated fluoroscopic images may improve intraoperative guidance. This article describes a workflow with VSP in SIJF using simulated fluoroscopic images and evaluates achieved implant placement accuracy. Ten interventions were performed on 10 patients by the same surgeon, resulting in a total of 30 implants; the median age was 39 years, and all patients were female. The overall mean implant placement accuracy was 4.9 ± 1.26 mm and 4.0 ± 1.44°. There were no malpositioning complications. VSP helped the surgeon understand the anatomy and determine the optimal position and length of the implants. The planned positions of the implants could be reproduced in surgery with what appears to be a clinically acceptable level of accuracy.

Minimally Invasive SI Joint Fusion Procedures for Chronic SI Joint Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Safety and Efficacy.

Sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion is increasingly used to treat chronic SI joint pain. Multiple surgical approaches are now available. Data abstraction and random effects meta-analysis of safety and efficacy outcomes from published patient cohorts. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and safety measures were stratified by surgical technique: transiliac, including lateral transiliac (LTI) and posterolateral transiliac (PLTI), and posterior interpositional (PI) procedures. Fifty-seven cohorts of 2851 patients were identified, including 43 cohorts (2126 patients) for LTI, 6 cohorts (228 patients) for PLTI, and 8 cohorts (497 patients) for PI procedures. Randomized trials were only available for LTI. PROs were available for pain (numeric rating scale) in 57 cohorts (2851 patients) and disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]) in 37 cohorts (1978 patients).All studies with PROs showed improvement from baseline after surgery. Meta-analytic improvements in pain scores were highest for LTI (4.8 points [0-10 scale]), slightly lower for PLTI (4.2 points), and lowest for PI procedures (3.8 points, P = 0.1533). Mean improvements in ODI scores were highest for LTI (25.9 points), lowest for PLTI procedures (6.8 points), and intermediate for PI (16.3 points, P = 0.0095).For safety outcomes, acute symptomatic implant malposition was 0.43% for LTI, 0% for PLTI, and 0.2% for PI procedures. Wound infection was reported in 0.15% of LTI, 0% of PLTI, and 0% of PI procedures. Bleeding requiring surgical intervention was reported in 0.04% of LTI procedures and not reported for PLTI or PI. Breakage and migration were not reported for any device. Radiographic imaging evaluation reporting implant placement accuracy and fusion was only available for LTI. Literature support for SI joint fusion is growing. The LTI procedure contains the largest body of available evidence and shows the largest improvements in pain and ODI. Only LTI procedures have independent radiographic evidence of fusion and implant placement. The adverse event rate for all procedures was low.

Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty improved component alignment in the coronal plane compared with navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty: a comparative study.

The purpose of this study was to directly compare implant placement accuracy and postoperative limb alignment between robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty and navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty. This retrospective case-control study included a consecutive series of 182 knees (robotic-assisted group, n = 103 knees; navigation-assisted group, n = 79). An image-free handheld robotic system (NAVIO) or an image-free navigation system (Precision N) was used. Component and limb alignment were evaluated on three-dimensional computed tomography scans and full-length standing anterior-posterior radiographs. We compared the errors between the final intraoperative plan and the postoperative coronal and sagittal alignment of the components and the hip-knee-ankle angle between the two groups. The orientation of the femoral and tibial components in the coronal plane were more accurate in the robotic-assisted group than in the navigation-assisted group (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the orientation of the femoral and tibial component in the sagittal plane between the two groups. There were fewer outliers in the tibial coronal plane in the robotic-assisted group (p < 0.05). There was also no significant difference in the frequency of outlying values for coronal or sagittal alignment of the femoral component or sagittal alignment of the tibial component or the hip-knee-ankle angle between the two groups. Robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty using a handheld image-free system improved component alignment in the coronal plane compared with total knee arthroplasty using an image-free navigation system. Robotic surgery helps surgeons to achieve personalised alignment that may result in better clinical outcomes.

Effect of the level of alveolar atrophy on implant placement accuracy in guided surgery for full-arch restorations supported by four implants: an in vitro study

BackgroundA fixed screw-retained full-arch restoration supported by four implants is a popular treatment option for edentulous arches. Optimal alignment of implants is quite challenging in extremely atrophied edentulous cases, and a small amount of deviation is expected during guided surgery. This study aimed to compare implant accuracy among edentulous jaws with various levels of atrophy.MethodsFive separate copies of each Cawood and Howell model (III–V) were produced for the maxilla and mandible. A total of 120 implants (30 models). The implant accuracy was assessed based on angular deviations at the base (angle, 3D offset, distal, vestibular, and apical) and tip (3D offset, distal, vestibular, and apical).ResultsThe atrophy level of the jaws had a statistically significant effect on deviation; implants showed greater deviation from the planned location as the atrophy level increased.ConclusionGiven that implant deviation increased with the degree of atrophy, a greater safety margin from important anatomical structures is recommended when planning implant location for guided surgery in Cawood and Howell V cases.