Accuracy of Dynamic Computer-Assisted Surgery for Pterygoid Implant Placement in Fully and Partially Edentulous Maxillae: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Background and Objectives: The rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior maxilla with pterygoid implant presents a significant challenge due to complex regional anatomy and limited visual access. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of a dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery system (dCAIS) for pterygoid implant placement in fully and partially edentulous maxillae using radiographic marker registration (RMR) and markerless tracing registration (MTR), respectively. Materials and Methods: Forty pterygoid implants were retrospectively evaluated in 40 patients, divided into two groups: fully edentulous (n = 20) and partially edentulous (n = 20). Implant placement was performed using a dynamic navigation system (dCAIS), utilizing either bone-anchored mini-screws or tooth-surface tracing as reference points. Accuracy was assessed by superimposing preoperative plans with postoperative cone beam computer tomography (CBCT) scans. Coronal, apical, and angular deviations were measured and analyzed using the Data Science Workbench (version 14). The level of statistical significance was set at α = 0.05 (two-tailed). Results: The mean deviations for fully and partially edentulous maxillae measured 1.24 ± 0.27 mm and 1.40 ± 0.27 mm at the coronal level (p = 0.065), 1.30 ± 0.49 mm and 1.30 ± 0.54 at the apical level (p = 0.995), and 0.72 ± 0.38° and 0.82 ± 0.43° in angular deviation (p = 0.560), respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups. Notably, mean angular deviation was remarkably low (<1°) in both groups. Conclusions: No statistically significant between-group differences in accuracy were detected in coronal, apical, and angular deviations between the markerless tracing registration method in partially edentulous patients and the bone-anchored radiographic marker registration method in fully edentulous patients.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicina
Published
2026-09-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62091710
Primary Topic
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Accuracy of Dynamic Computer-Assisted Surgery for Pterygoid Implant Placement in Fully and Partially Edentulous Maxillae: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Luka Plivelić, Ana Zulijani, Ivica Dubravica, Vlatka Debeljak et al.
Medicina
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
article

Accuracy of Dynamic Computer-Assisted Surgery for Pterygoid Implant Placement in Fully and Partially Edentulous Maxillae: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Luka Plivelić, Ana Zulijani, Ivica Dubravica, Vlatka Debeljak, Ivan Zajc
article en

Abstract

Background and Objectives: The rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior maxilla with pterygoid implant presents a significant challenge due to complex regional anatomy and limited visual access. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of a dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery system (dCAIS) for pterygoid implant placement in fully and partially edentulous maxillae using radiographic marker registration (RMR) and markerless tracing registration (MTR), respectively. Materials and Methods: Forty pterygoid implants were retrospectively evaluated in 40 patients, divided into two groups: fully edentulous (n = 20) and partially edentulous (n = 20). Implant placement was performed using a dynamic navigation system (dCAIS), utilizing either bone-anchored mini-screws or tooth-surface tracing as reference points. Accuracy was assessed by superimposing preoperative plans with postoperative cone beam computer tomography (CBCT) scans. Coronal, apical, and angular deviations were measured and analyzed using the Data Science Workbench (version 14). The level of statistical significance was set at α = 0.05 (two-tailed). Results: The mean deviations for fully and partially edentulous maxillae measured 1.24 ± 0.27 mm and 1.40 ± 0.27 mm at the coronal level (p = 0.065), 1.30 ± 0.49 mm and 1.30 ± 0.54 at the apical level (p = 0.995), and 0.72 ± 0.38° and 0.82 ± 0.43° in angular deviation (p = 0.560), respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups. Notably, mean angular deviation was remarkably low (<1°) in both groups. Conclusions: No statistically significant between-group differences in accuracy were detected in coronal, apical, and angular deviations between the markerless tracing registration method in partially edentulous patients and the bone-anchored radiographic marker registration method in fully edentulous patients.

MedicinaVol. 62(9)
University of Rijeka (HR), University of Zagreb (HR), Polyclinic Medical Center (US), University Hospital Dubrava (HR), University of Osijek (HR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.