口腔医学研究

口腔医学研究 ›› 2026, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (3): 201-205.DOI: 10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2026.03.005

• 口腔种植学研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

配准装置U型管的复位次数对动态导航植入精度的影响

邵旭鹏1,2, 董臣欣3, 张舒3, 杨胜银1, 谢志刚2,3*   

  1. 1.昆明医科大学附属口腔医院第一门诊部 云南 昆明 650000;
    2.云南省口腔医学重点实验室 云南 昆明 650000;
    3.昆明医科大学附属口腔医院口腔种植科 云南 昆明 650000
  • 收稿日期:2025-10-09 发布日期:2026-03-26
  • 通讯作者: * 谢志刚,E-mail:13708425039@163.com
  • 作者简介:邵旭鹏(1995~ ),男,甘肃天水人,硕士,住院医师,研究方向:数字化口腔种植。
  • 基金资助:
    兴滇英才-医疗卫生人才项目(编号:XDYC-YLWS-2023-049);云南省科技厅昆明医科大学联合专项重点项目(编号:202101AY070001-025);云南省口腔疾病临床医学研究中心重点项目(编号:2022ZD005)

Effect of Reset Times of Registration U-tube on Accuracy of Dynamic Navigation Implantation

SHAO Xupeng1,2, DONG Chenxin3, ZHANG Shu3, YANG Shengyin1, XIE Zhigang2,3*   

  1. 1. First Outpatient Department, Kunming Medical University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Kunming 650000, China;
    2. Yunnan Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Kunming 650000, China;
    3. Department of Oral Implantology, Kunming Medical University School and Hospital of Stomatology, Kunming 650000, China
  • Received:2025-10-09 Published:2026-03-26

PDF (PC)

13

摘要： 目的:对比配准装置U型管的复位次数对动态导航植入精度的影响。方法:本研究根据配准装置U型管的复位次数分为1次复位组和2次复位组,在动态导航引导下植入72枚种植体(1次复位组27枚,2次复位组45枚),比较两组种植体计划植入位置与实际植入位置在植入点误差、末端点误差、植体角度误差3个指标上的差异。结果:1次复位组植入点误差为(0.94±0.41) mm、末端点误差为(0.93±0.38) mm、植体角度误差为(1.19±0.97)°;2次复位组的误差依次为(1.10±0.41) mm、(1.15±0.37) mm、(2.32±0.78)°。U型管的复位次数在植入点误差、植体角度误差指标比较均无统计学差异(P>0.05);在末端点误差比较有统计学差异(P<0.05),2次复位末端点误差大于1次复位的误差值。结论:配准装置U型管复位的准确性会影响动态导航的植入精度,临床中应该考虑配准装置复位次数造成的误差。通过采用术前佩戴U型管拍摄锥形束计算机断层扫描(cone beam computed tomography,CBCT),配准完成后再取下的1次复位的方法不仅优化了临床操作程序,提高临床效率,同时减少误差产生,提高了种植手术精准度。

关键词: 动态导航, 配准, U型管, 精准度

Abstract: Objective: To compare the effect of reset times of the registration U-tube on the accuracy of dynamic navigation implantation. Methods: In this study, the reset times of the U-tube was divided into One-time reset and Two-time reset. The implants were placed under the guidance of dynamic navigation, among the 72 implants, 27 were in the One-time reset group and 45 were in the Two-time reset group. The differences between the planned implant position and actual implant position in terms of three indicators, i.e. the entry deviation, apex deviation, and angular deviation, were compared. Results: The entry deviation, apex deviation, and angular deviation of One-time reset group and Two-time reset group were (0.94±0.41) mm and (1.10±0.41) mm, (0.93±0.38) mm and (1.15±0.37) mm, and (1.19±0.97)° and (2.32±0.78)°. No significant difference was found on the entry deviation and angular deviation between One-time reset group and Two-time reset group (P>0.05), however, statistically significant difference in the apex deviation (P<0.05), with the Two-time reset group showed a larger deviation than One-time reset group. Conclusion: The accuracy of the U-tube reset will affect the implantation accuracy of the dynamic navigation. In clinical practice, the deviation caused by reset times of the registration U-tube should be considered. The U-tube should be worn before surgery to scan cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and then removed after the registration. The One-time reset not only optimizes clinical procedures but also improves clinical efficiency, while reducing deviation and enhancing the accuracy of implant surgery.

Key words: dynamic navigation, registration, U-tube, accuracy