Bilgisayar Destekli-Rehberli İmplant Cerrahisi
Özet
Dental implantların çene kemiğine ideal konumda yerleştirilmesi cerrahi komplikasyonları azaltırken, bilgisayar destekli rehberli implant cerrahisi bu süreçte tedavi süresini kısaltan, post-operatif ağrı, ödem ve kanama riskini minimize eden yenilikçi bir yöntemdir. X-ışınlarının keşfinden günümüzün gelişmiş 3 boyutlu konik ışınlı bilgisayarlı tomografi (CBCT) ve CAD/CAM teknolojilerine kadar uzanan süreç, cerrahi şablonların ve navigasyon sistemlerinin gelişimini sağlamıştır. Genel olarak statik (cerrahi şablon kullanımı) ve dinamik (gerçek zamanlı navigasyon) olmak üzere iki ana protokol bildirilmiş; statik sistemler kendi içinde destek yüzeylerine göre diş, mukoza veya kemik destekli olarak sınıflandırılmıştır. Bilgisayar destekli bu yaklaşımlar implantların yüksek hassasiyetle yerleştirilmesi ve anatomik yapıların korunması gibi belirgin avantajlar sunsa da, sınırlı ağız açıklığında uygulama zorluğu, el hassasiyetinin hissedilememesi ve stereolitografik kılavuz kırılması gibi intraoperatif komplikasyon risklerini de barındırmaktadır. ITI (International Team for Implantology) konsensus raporları dahil olmak üzere literatür verileri, parsiyel dişsiz vakalarda statik bilgisayar destekli cerrahinin yüksek başarı ve kesinlik sağladığını, ancak planlanan ve son implant pozisyonu arasında özellikle apikal bölgede hala klinik sapmaların (ortalama 1.2-1.5 mm) olabileceğini göstermektedir. Sonuç olarak, bu modern teknolojiler cerrahi süreci kolaylaştırıp protez odaklı immediat yüklemeye izin verse de kümülatif hataları önlemek adına doğru vaka seçimi, klinisyenin deneyimi ve kapsamlı planlama hayati önem taşımaktadır.
The placement of dental implants in the ideal position within the jawbone reduces surgical complications, and computer-aided guided implant surgery is an innovative method that shortens treatment time and minimizes post-operative pain, edema, and bleeding risks. The historical process extending from the discovery of X-rays to today's advanced 3D cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and CAD/CAM technologies has enabled the development of surgical templates and navigation systems. In general, two main protocols have been reported as static (using a surgical template) and dynamic (real-time navigation), and static systems are classified as tooth, mucosa, or bone-supported based on their supporting surfaces. Although these computer-aided approaches offer distinct advantages such as high-precision implant placement and preservation of anatomical structures, they also carry intraoperative complication risks including difficulty of application in limited mouth opening, lack of tactile sensation, and stereolithographic guide fractures. Literature data, including the ITI (International Team for Implantology) consensus reports, demonstrate that static computer-aided surgery achieves high success and accuracy in partially edentulous cases; however, clinical deviations (averaging 1.2-1.5 mm) can still occur between the planned and final implant positions, particularly in the apical region. Consequently, while these modern technologies facilitate the surgical process and allow for prosthesis-guided immediate loading, proper case selection, clinician experience, and comprehensive planning remain vital to prevent cumulative errors.
Referanslar
Keevil G. The roentgen rays. J Am Med Assoc. 1833;XXVI(7):336.
Marsh H. A case of Roentgen photography. Br Med J. 1848;1318–20.
Ambrose J, Hounsfield G. Computerized transverse axial tomography. Br J Radiol. 1973 Feb;46(542):148–9.
Hounsfield GN. Computed medical imaging. Med Phys [Internet]. 1980 Jul 1;7(4):283–90. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.594709
Brown R. A stereotactic head frame for use with CT body scanners. Invest Radiol. 1979;14:300–4.
Walsh P, Larson S, Rytel M, Maiman D. Stereotactic aspiration of deep cerebral abscesses after CT-directed labeling. Appl Neurophysio. 1980;43:205–9.
Solomon W. The viewing wand - its introduction and uses. Br J Theatr Nurs. 1996;6:11–4.
Sipos E, Tebo S, Zinreich S, Long D, Brem H. In Vivo accuracy testing and clinical experience with the ISG Viewing Wand. Neurosurgery. 1996;39:202–4.
Dyer P V, Patel N, Pell GM, Cummins B, Sandeman DR. The ISG viewing wand: an application to atlanto-axial cervical surgery using the Le Fort I maxillary osteotomy. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg [Internet]. 1995 Dec 1;33(6):370–4. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-4356(95)90138-8
Schlenzka D, Laine T, Lund T. Computer-assisted spine surgery. Eur Spine J. 2000;9(1):57–64.
Buser D, Wittneben J, Bornstein MM, Grütter L, Chappuis V, Belser UC. Stability of Contour Augmentation and Esthetic Outcomes of Implant-Supported Single Crowns in the Esthetic Zone: 3-Year Results of a Prospective Study With Early Implant Placement Postextraction. J Periodontol [Internet]. 2011 Mar 1;82(3):342–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2010.100408
Tarnow DP, Cho SC, Wallace SS. The Effect of Inter-Implant Distance on the Height of Inter-Implant Bone Crest. J Periodontol [Internet]. 2000 Apr 1;71(4):546–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2000.71.4.546
Hermann JS, Schoolfield JD, Schenk RK, Buser D, Cochran DL. Influence of the Size of the Microgap on Crestal Bone Changes Around Titanium Implants. A Histometric Evaluation of Unloaded Non-Submerged Implants in the Canine Mandible. J Periodontol [Internet]. 2001 Oct 1;72(10):1372–83. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2001.72.10.1372
D’haese J, Ackhurst J, Wismeijer D, De Bruyn H, Tahmaseb A. Current state of the art of computer-guided implant surgery. Periodontol 2000 [Internet]. 2017 Feb 1;73(1):121–33. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12175
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(Supplement):25–42.
Petrikowski CG, Pharoah MJ, Schmitt A. Presurgical radiographic assessment for implants. J Prosthet Dent [Internet]. 1989;61(1):59–64. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022391389901108
Babbush CA. Provisional Implants: Surgical and Prosthetic Aspects. Implant Dent [Internet]. 2001;10(2). Available from: https://journals.lww.com/implantdent/Fulltext/2001/04000/Provisional_Implants__Surgical_and_Prosthetic.7.aspx
Joda T, Gallucci GO. The virtual patient in dental medicine. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(6):725–6.
Stumpel LJ 3rd. Cast-based guided implant placement: a novel technique. J Prosthet Dent. 2008 Jul;100(1):61–9.
Cehreli MC, Aslan Y, Sahin S. Bilaminar dual-purpose stent for placement of dental implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2000 Jul;84(1):55–8.
Cehreli MC, Caliş AC, Sahin S. A dual-purpose guide for optimum placement of dental implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2002 Dec;88(6):640–3.
Lal K, White GS, Morea DN, Wright RF. Use of stereolithographic templates for surgical and prosthodontic implant planning and placement. Part I. The concept. J Prosthodont Off J Am Coll Prosthodont. 2006;15(1):51–8.
D’Souza KM, Aras MA. Types of implant surgical guides in dentistry: a review. J Oral Implantol. 2012 Oct;38(5):643–52.
Ramasamy M, Giri, Raja R, Subramonian, Karthik, Narendrakumar R. Implant surgical guides: From the past to the present. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2013 Jun;5(Suppl 1):S98–102.
Kola MZ, Shah AH, Khalil HS, Rabah AM, Harby NMH, Sabra SA, et al. Surgical templates for dental implant positioning; current knowledge and clinical perspectives. Niger J Surg Off Publ Niger Surg Res Soc. 2015;21(1):1–5.
Burns DR, Crabtree DG, Bell DH. Template for positioning and angulation of intraosseous implants. J Prosthet Dent. 1988 Oct;60(4):479–83.
Zinner ID, Small SA, Panno F V. Presurgical prosthetics and surgical templates. Dent Clin North Am. 1989 Oct;33(4):619–33.
Borrow JW, Smith JP. Stent marker materials for computerized tomograph-assisted implant planning. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1996 Feb;16(1):60–7.
Espinosa Marino J, Alvarez Arenal A, Pardo Ceballos A, Fernandez Vazquez JP, Ibaseta Diaz G. Fabrication of an implant radiologic-surgical stent for the partially edentulous patient. Quintessence Int. 1995 Feb;26(2):111–4.
Engelman MJ, Sorensen JA, Moy P. Optimum placement of osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent. 1988 Apr;59(4):467–73.
Kraut RA. Interactive radiologic diagnosis and case planning for implants. Vol. 5, Dental implantology update. United States; 1994. p. 49–55.
Edge MJ. Surgical placement guide for use with osseointegrated implants. J Prosthet Dent. 1987 Jun;57(6):719–22.
Nikzad S, Azari A. A novel stereolithographic surgical guide template for planning treatment involving a mandibular dental implant. J oral Maxillofac Surg Off J Am Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008 Jul;66(7):1446–54.
Oh W-S, Saglik B. Use of a thermoplastic vacuum-formed matrix for secure engagement of an implant surgical template. J Prosthet Dent. 2008 Oct;100(4):326–7.
Horwitz J, Zuabi O, Machtei EE. Accuracy of a computerized tomography-guided template-assisted implant placement system: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 Oct;20(10):1156–62.
Komiyama A, Klinge B, Hultin M. Treatment outcome of immediately loaded implants installed in edentulous jaws following computer-assisted virtual treatment planning and flapless surgery. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008 Jul;19(7):677–85.
Jung RE, Schneider D, Ganeles J, Wismeijer D, Zwahlen M, Hämmerle CHF, et al. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24 Suppl:92–109.
Di Giacomo GAP, Cury PR, de Araujo NS, Sendyk WR, Sendyk CL. Clinical application of stereolithographic surgical guides for implant placement: preliminary results. J Periodontol. 2005 Apr;76(4):503–7.
De Bruyn H, Atashkadeh M, Cosyn J, van de Velde T. Clinical outcome and bone preservation of single TiUniteTM implants installed with flapless or flap surgery. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2011 Sep;13(3):175–83.
Johansson B, Friberg B, Nilson H. Digitally Planned, Immediately Loaded Dental Implants with Prefabricated Prostheses in the Reconstruction of Edentulous Maxillae: A 1-Year Prospective, Multicenter Study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res [Internet]. 2009 Sep 1;11(3):194–200. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00111.x
Gallucci GO, Benic GI, Eckert SE, Papaspyridakos P, Schimmel M, Schrott A, et al. Consensus statements and clinical recommendations for implant loading protocols. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29 Suppl:287–90.
D’haese J, Van De Velde T, Elaut L, De Bruyn H. A Prospective Study on the Accuracy of Mucosally Supported Stereolithographic Surgical Guides in Fully Edentulous Maxillae. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res [Internet]. 2012 Apr 1;14(2):293–303. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00255.x
D’haese J, Van De Velde T, Komiyama A, Hultin M, De Bruyn H. Accuracy and Complications Using Computer-Designed Stereolithographic Surgical Guides for Oral Rehabilitation by Means of Dental Implants: A Review of the Literature. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res [Internet]. 2012 Jun 1;14(3):321–35. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00275.x
Lin G-H, Chan H-L, Bashutski JD, Oh T-J, Wang H-L. The effect of flapless surgery on implant survival and marginal bone level: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol. 2014 May;85(5):e91-103.
Moraschini V, Velloso G, Luz D, Barboza EP. Implant survival rates, marginal bone level changes, and complications in full-mouth rehabilitation with flapless computer-guided surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Jul;44(7):892–901.
Voulgarakis A, Strub JR, Att W. Outcomes of implants placed with three different flapless surgical procedures: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014 Apr;43(4):476–86.
Moore JR. A modification of stent design for preprosthetic surgery. J Oral Surg. 1970 Apr;28(4):263–6.
Firtell DN, Oatis GW, Curtis TA, Sugg WEJ. A stent for a split-thickness skin graft vestibuloplasty. J Prosthet Dent. 1976 Aug;36(2):204–10.
Bouri AJ, Bissada N, Al-Zahrani MS, Faddoul F, Nouneh I. Width of keratinized gingiva and the health status of the supporting tissues around dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(2):323–6.
Sennerby L, Andersson P, Pagliani L, Giani C, Moretti G, Molinari M, et al. Evaluation of a Novel Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scanner for Bone Density Examinations in Preoperative 3D Reconstructions and Correlation with Primary Implant Stability. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Oct;17(5):844–53.
Joda T, Derksen W, Wittneben JG, Kuehl S. Static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS) analysing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), economics and surgical complications: A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res [Internet]. 2018 Oct 1;29(S16):359–73. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13136
Flügge T, van der Meer WJ, Gonzalez BG, Vach K, Wismeijer D, Wang P. The accuracy of different dental impression techniques for implant-supported dental prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res [Internet]. 2018 Oct 1;29(S16):374–92. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13273
Fokas G, Vaughn VM, Scarfe WC, Bornstein MM. Accuracy of linear measurements on CBCT images related to presurgical implant treatment planning: A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res [Internet]. 2018 Oct 1;29(S16):393–415. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13142
