Evaluation of Computer-Aided Navigation and Augmented Reality for Bicortical Mini-Implant Placement in Maxillary Expansion: An In Vitro Study

TL;DR

This study compares the accuracy of different techniques for placing dental implants in the palate, finding augmented reality to be the most precise.

Contribution

The study introduces a novel in vitro comparison of AR, computer-aided navigation, and freehand techniques for mini-implant placement in maxillary expansion.

Findings

Augmented reality placement showed the highest accuracy in implant positioning.

Computer-aided navigation was more accurate than freehand techniques.

Statistically significant differences were found in entry points and angular deviations across techniques.

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to evaluate and compare the accuracy of the computer-aided static navigation technique (NAV), augmented reality (AR) and freehand placement technique (FHT) for the bicortical orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants for maxillary skeletal expansion (MSE) appliances placed in palate. Material and Methods: A total of 120 bicortical orthodontic self-drilling mini-implants were placed in the palate of ten 3D printed anatomically based polyurethane models of a completely edentulous upper maxilla. The orthodontic mini-implants were randomly assigned to the following placement techniques: (A) computer-aided static navigation technique (n = 40) (NAV), (B) augmented reality device (n = 40) (AR) and (C) conventional freehand technique (n = 40) (FHT). Moreover, two implants were placed in each side of the midpalatal suture in every model according to the digital planification of the expander device. Subsequently, the orthodontic mini-implants were placed and postoperative CBCT scans were performed. Finally, coronal entry-point (mm), apical end-point (mm) and angular deviations (°) were calculated using a t-test. Results: Statistically significant differences were shown at coronal entry-point (p < 0.001), apical end-point (p < 0.001) and angular deviations (p < 0.001) between the three placement techniques of bicortical orthodontic mini-implants. Additionally, statistically significant differences were also shown between the orthodontic mini-implant positions concerning the entry point (p = 0.004) and angular deviation (p = 0.004). Conclusions: The augmented reality placement technique results are more accurate, followed by the computer-aided static navigation technique and the freehand technique for MSE appliances placed in palate.

Figures