Advertisement

Zygomatic implant placement using a robot-assisted flapless protocol: proof of concept

  • M. Olivetto
    Correspondence
    Correspondence to: Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Hospital Centre of Annecy Geneva, F-74370 Épagny Metz-Tessy, France.
    Affiliations
    Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, Hospital Centre of Annecy Geneva, Épagny Metz-Tessy, France

    Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of Amiens-Picardy, University Medical Centre, Amiens, France
    Search for articles by this author
  • J. Bettoni
    Affiliations
    Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of Amiens-Picardy, University Medical Centre, Amiens, France
    Search for articles by this author
  • S. Testelin
    Affiliations
    Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital of Amiens-Picardy, University Medical Centre, Amiens, France
    Search for articles by this author
  • M. Lefranc
    Affiliations
    Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital of Amiens-Picardy, University Medical Centre, Amiens, France
    Search for articles by this author
Published:December 12, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2022.12.002

      Abstract

      Robotic assistance can help in physically guiding the drilling trajectory during zygomatic implant positioning. A new robot-assisted strategy for a flapless zygomatic implant placement protocol is reported here. In this protocol, a preoperative computed tomography scan is used to plan the surgical path. After surface registration, the ROSA robot (Zimmer Biomet Robotics) guides several steps, which are performed with shared control. The surgeon performs the drilling and tapping, guided by the robotic arm, which is positioned according to the planned trajectory. Placement of the zygomatic implant is done manually. Immediate intraoperative 3D verification is performed by cone beam computed tomography (flat-panel detector, Medtronic O-arm II). Four zygomatic implants were placed in the case patient according to the flapless protocol, with a mean vector error of 1.78 mm (range 0.52–4.70 mm). A screw-retained temporary prosthesis was placed on the same day. No significant complications were observed. The application of this robot-assisted surgical protocol, which guarantees a very high degree of precision, may reduce inaccuracies in the positioning of zygomatic implants that could deviate from the surgeon’s plan. This appears to be a potentially safe flapless surgery technique. Drill slipping on the crest or on the maxillary wall is the main source of error in this procedure, emphasizing the usefulness of the assisted surgical guidance with haptic feedback.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Bedrossian E.
        Rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla with the zygoma concept: a 7-year prospective study.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010; 25: 1213-1221
        • Tuminelli F.J.
        • Walter L.R.
        • Neugarten J.
        • Bedrossian E.
        Immediate loading of zygomatic implants: a systematic review of implant survival, prosthesis survival and potential complications.
        Eur J Oral Implantol. 2017; 10: 79-87
        • Chrcanovic B.R.
        • Albrektsson T.
        • Wennerberg A.
        Survival and complications of zygomatic implants: an updated systematic review.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 74: 1949-1964
        • Aparicio C.
        Zygomatic Implants: the Anatomy-Guided Approach.
        Quintessence Publishing, 2012
        • Molinero-Mourelle P.
        • Baca-Gonzalez L.
        • Gao B.
        • Saez-Alcaide L.M.
        • Helm A.
        • Lopez-Quiles J.
        Surgical complications in zygomatic implants: a systematic review.
        Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2016; 21: e751-e757
        • Liu L.
        • Mariani S.G.
        • De Schlichting E.
        • Grand S.
        • Lefranc M.
        • Seigneuret E.
        • Chabardès S.
        Frameless ROSA robot-assisted lead implantation for deep brain stimulation: technique and accuracy.
        Oper Neurosurg. 2020; 19: 57-64https://doi.org/10.1093/ons/opz320
        • Schiroli G.
        • Angiero F.
        • Zangerl A.
        • Benedicenti S.
        • Ferrante F.
        • Widmann G.
        Accuracy of a flapless protocol for computer-guided zygomatic implant placement in human cadavers: expectations and reality.
        Int J Med Robot. 2016; 12: 102-108https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1646
        • Lefranc M.
        • Capel C.
        • Pruvot A.S.
        • Fichten A.
        • Desenclos C.
        • Toussaint P.
        • Le Gars D.
        • Peltier J.
        The impact of the reference imaging modality, registration method and intraoperative flat-panel computed tomography on the accuracy of the ROSA stereotactic robot.
        Stereotact Funct Neurosurg. 2014; 92: 242-250https://doi.org/10.1159/000362936
        • Cao Z.
        • Qin C.
        • Fan S.
        • Yu D.
        • Wu Y.
        • Qin J.
        • Chen X.
        Pilot study of a surgical robot system for zygomatic implant placement.
        Med Eng Phys. 2020; 75: 72-78https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2019.07.020
      1. Medtronic: O-arm imaging system. Technical specification guide. 〈https://www.medtronic.com/content/dam/medtronic-com/products/neurological/surgical-imaging-systems/o-arm/documents/uc201602922en-o-arm-o2-tech-specs.pdf〉 [Accessibility verified December 3, 2022].

        • Wu Y.
        • Wang F.
        • Huang W.
        • Fan S.
        Real-time navigation in zygomatic implant placement: workflow.
        Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin N Am. 2019; 31: 357-367https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coms.2019.03.001
        • Pellegrino G.
        • Lizio G.
        • Basile F.
        • Stefanelli L.V.
        • Marchetti C.
        • Felice P.
        Dynamic navigation for zygomatic implants: a case report about a protocol with intraoral anchored reference tool and an up-to-date review of the available protocols.
        Methods Protoc. 2020; 3E75https://doi.org/10.3390/mps3040075
        • Cleary K.
        • Peters T.M.
        Image-guided interventions: technology review and clinical applications.
        Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2010; 12: 119-142https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-bioeng-070909-105249
        • Schiroli G.
        • Angiero F.
        • Silvestrini-Biavati A.
        • Benedicenti S.
        Zygomatic implant placement with flapless computer-guided surgery: a proposed clinical protocol.
        J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011; 69: 2979-2989https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2011.03.050