The primary objective of implant insertion is optimal prosthetic implant positioning while simultaneously protecting sensitive anatomical structures. In this context, navigated implants show significantly better results than freehand-inserted implants. Computer-assisted navigation, in combination with three-dimensional (3D) imaging by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), is an ideal way to achieve higher predictability for successful implant therapy. Basically, one can distinguish between static navigation using templates, and direct dynamic navigation using optical transmission systems. Both options demonstrate comparably good results as far as the precision of implant positioning is concerned. Today, the gold standard is digital manufacturing of the template. Direct navigation is the more attractive option, provided acquisition costs can be reduced by simplifying the system. This article presents patient cases that demonstrate different variants of navigated implantology.
No clinical trial protocols linked to this paper
Clinical trials are automatically linked when NCT numbers are found in the paper's title or abstract.PICO Elements
No PICO elements extracted yet. Click "Extract PICO" to analyze this paper.
Paper Details
MeSH Terms
Associated Data
No associated datasets or code repositories found for this paper.
Related Papers
Related paper suggestions will be available in future updates.