Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 25, 2025
Dynamic Navigation in Endodontics: Guided Access Cavity Preparation by Means of a Miniaturized Navigation System
Published on: May 5, 2022
Accuracy and Efficiency of Endodontic Microsurgery Assisted by Dynamic Navigation Based on Two Different Registration
Zan Wang1, Chen Chen1, Li Qin1
1The State Key Laboratory of Oral & Maxillofacial Reconstruction and Regeneration, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, Hubei Key Laboratory of Stomatology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China; Department of Cariology and Endodontics, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
Introduction:
This study aimed to compare the accuracy and efficiency of dynamic navigation-assisted endodontic microsurgery (DN-EMS) using two different registration methods.
Methods:
Three-dimensional-printed jaw models, including 40 teeth, were divided into two groups (n = 20). Cone-beam computed tomography images of all teeth were scanned under the same exposing parameters. An endodontic dynamic navigation system (DHC-ENDO1) was used to plan the drilling paths. Dynamic navigation-assisted endodontic microsurgery (DN-EMS) was performed using either U-shaped tube (UT) or tooth cusp (TC) registration method. The accuracy was determined by platform deviation, end deviation, angular deviation, resection angle, and resection length deviation. The registration efficiency was defined as the time required to complete the registration procedure. Osteotomy volume of each resection was calculated by Mimics 21.0. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 24.0. Comparisons between groups were performed using the independent sample t test or Mann-Whitney U test. P < .05 was adopted as significant difference.
Results:
The UT group was significantly more accurate in terms of mean platform deviation, end deviation, angular deviation, and resection angle (P < .05). Resection length deviation did not differ significantly between the registration groups. The UT group was significantly more efficient than the TC group (P < .05). No significant differences were found in the osteotomy volumes between the two groups.
Conclusions:
In the model-based surgical simulation comparison, DN-EMS based on UT registration is more accurate and efficient than the TC method but requires an additional registration device. TC technique may be a reasonable alternative to UT registration in certain clinical tasks.
