A carregar...
Publicação
Comparação da precisão/exatidão entre a cirurgia navegada e total guiada em implantologia: revisão sistemática
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Projeto de pós-graduação_36948 | 1.19 MB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Introdução: A exatidão, precisão e o paralelismo na colocação de um implante, em relação ao que foi previamente planeado, são determinantes para a taxa de sucesso e a longevidade do mesmo. Por esse motivo, é fundamental assegurar que o implante seja posicionado o mais próximo possível da posição ideal definida durante o planeamento, uma vez que esta representa a localização mais adequada para a sua instalação.
Objetivo: Investigar se a técnica de navegação dinâmica oferece exatidão e precisão superiores, bem como menor desvio no paralelismo dos implantes, quando comparada à cirurgia guiada em implantologia.
Metodologia: Pesquisa bibliográfica em artigos publicados nas bases de dados PubMed, B-on, Web of Science, SciELO, Cochrane, Science Direct e Gray Lit. A seleção dos estudos seguiu critérios de inclusão e exclusão previamente definidos, sendo complementada pelas diretrizes do PRISMA. Os artigos mais relevantes para o objetivo do estudo foram selecionados. A avaliação do risco de viés foi realizada utilizando o instrumento Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal (2020).
Resultados: Dos 36 415 artigos recolhidos, 20 deles foram incluídos no estudo. Verificaram-se dificuldades como a ausência de respeito pela curva de aprendizagem, as amostras utilizadas, a ausência de estudos comparativos entre as 2 técnicas e a falta de padronização dos estudos. Conclusão: De acordo com a literatura vigente ambas as técnicas, cirurgia dinâmica e total guiada assistida por computador, apresentam resultados promissores ao nível da precisão e exatidão, sendo necessários mais estudos com protocolos mais padronizados e amostras mais amplas para uma seleção e para obter uma preferência.
Introduction: The accuracy, precision, and parallelism in implant placement, in relation to what was previously planned, are decisive for the success rate and longevity of the implant. For this reason, it is essential to ensure that the implant is positioned as close as possible to the ideal location defined during the planning phase, as this represents the most suitable site for its installation. Objective: To investigate whether dynamic navigation offers superior accuracy and precision, as well as less deviation in implant parallelism, when compared to guided surgery in implantology. Methodology: A literature review was conducted using articles published in the PubMed, B-on, Web of Science, SciELO, Cochrane, ScienceDirect, Gray Lit databases. The selection of studies followed previously defined inclusion and exclusion criteria and was complemented by the PRISMA guidelines. The most relevant articles for the objective of the study were selected. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool (2023). Results: Of the 36415 articles collected, 20 were included in the study. Difficulties such as lack of respect for the learning curve, the samples used, the absence of comparative studies between the two techniques, and the lack of standardization of the studies were noted. Conclusion: According to current literature, both techniques, computer-assisted dynamic and total guided surgery, present promising results in terms of precision and accuracy, and further studies are needed with more standardized protocols and larger samples for selection and to obtain a preference.
Introduction: The accuracy, precision, and parallelism in implant placement, in relation to what was previously planned, are decisive for the success rate and longevity of the implant. For this reason, it is essential to ensure that the implant is positioned as close as possible to the ideal location defined during the planning phase, as this represents the most suitable site for its installation. Objective: To investigate whether dynamic navigation offers superior accuracy and precision, as well as less deviation in implant parallelism, when compared to guided surgery in implantology. Methodology: A literature review was conducted using articles published in the PubMed, B-on, Web of Science, SciELO, Cochrane, ScienceDirect, Gray Lit databases. The selection of studies followed previously defined inclusion and exclusion criteria and was complemented by the PRISMA guidelines. The most relevant articles for the objective of the study were selected. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool (2023). Results: Of the 36415 articles collected, 20 were included in the study. Difficulties such as lack of respect for the learning curve, the samples used, the absence of comparative studies between the two techniques, and the lack of standardization of the studies were noted. Conclusion: According to current literature, both techniques, computer-assisted dynamic and total guided surgery, present promising results in terms of precision and accuracy, and further studies are needed with more standardized protocols and larger samples for selection and to obtain a preference.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Cirurgia assistida por computador Implantes dentários Navegação dinâmica Eficácia Cirurgia guiada de implantes Computer-assisted surgery Dental implants Dynamic navigation Efficacy Guided implant surgery