Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
MedNext Journal of Medical and Health Sciences
Review
DOI: 10.54448/mdnt22S403
Submitted: 07-12-2022
Published: 07-12-2022

Virtual and minimally traumatic surgery in bucomaxillofacial procedures: a concise systematic review

UNORTE - University Center of Northern São Paulo, Dentistry department, Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil / UNIPOS - Post graduate and continuing education, Dentistry department, Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil
UNORTE - University Center of Northern São Paulo, Dentistry department, Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil / UNIPOS - Post graduate and continuing education, Dentistry department, Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil
UNORTE - University Center of Northern São Paulo, Dentistry department, Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil / UNIPOS - Post graduate and continuing education, Dentistry department, Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil
UNORTE - University Center of Northern São Paulo, Dentistry department, Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil / UNIPOS - Post graduate and continuing education, Dentistry department, Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil
Virtual surgery Guided surgery Minimally invasive surgery Minimally traumatic surgery Maxillofacial surgery

Abstract

Introduction: In recent years, maxillary atrophy is an increasingly frequent clinical condition and the causes that lead to focal or generalized atrophy are multiple factors. Based on the histological concept in which living tissues are formed by cells joined by thin elastic tissue and with nerve fibrils, capillaries, lymphatic and blood vessels. The disruption of these cells by surgical trauma provides the release of enzymes that delay healing. For this reason, surgical trauma should be minimized. Objective: Aimed to perform a brief review of the main considerations of virtual and minimally traumatic surgery in the context of maxillofacial surgery. Methods: The model used for the review was PRISMA. We used databases such as Scielo, Lilacs, Google Scholar, PubMed. The Cochrane Instrument was used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. Results and Conclusion: A total of 118 articles were found involving virtual and minimally invasive surgery in maxillofacial procedures. A total of 56 articles were fully evaluated and 28 were included in this study. the main considerations regarding minimally traumatic surgery are the attempt to minimize the professional's effort, reduce surgical time and alleviate bleeding and inflammatory processes, edema, pain, and ecchymosis that can affect patients. Thus, the maximum preservation of the integrity of the soft tissues adjacent to the prosthetic spaces and the preservation of the level of the ridge of the alveolar bone to achieve a minimization of surgical trauma must be sought.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. Faciola Pessôa de Oliveira PG, Pedroso Bergamo ET, Bordin D, Arbex L, Konrad D, Gil LF, Neiva R, Tovar N, Witek L, Coelho PG. Ridge Architecture Preservation Following Minimally Traumatic Exodontia Techniques and Guided Tissue Regeneration. Implant Dent. 2019 Aug;28(4):319-328. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000886. PMID: 31008823.
  2. You JS, Kim SG, OH JS, Kim JS. Effects of Platelet-Derived Material (Platelet-Rich Fibrin) on Bone Regeneration. Implant Dent. 2019 Mar 8 [doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000877].
  3. Pye AD, Lockhart DEA, Dawson MP, Murray CA, Smith AJ. A review of dental implants and infection. J Hosp Infect ; 2009, 72:104–110.
  4. Bra°nemark PI, Hansson BO, Adell R, Breine U, Lindstrom J, Hallen O et al. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl. 1977, 16:1–192.
  5. Bugarin Júnior JG, Garrafaii V. Bioethics and biosafety: the use of biomaterials in dental practice. Rev Saúde Pública; 2007, 41(2):223-8.
  6. Jahangiri L, Devlin H, Ting K, Nishimura I. Current perspectives in residual ridge remodeling and its clinical implications: a review. J Prosthet Dent; 80:224–37, 1998.
  7. Wheeler SL, Vogel RE, Casellini R. Tissue preservation and maintenance of optimum esthetics: a clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants;15:265-271, 2000.
  8. Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Lozada J. Immediate placement and provisionalization of maxillary anterior single implants: 1-year prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants;18:31-39, 2003.
  9. Mazaro JVQ, Godoy Pai, Junior JFS, Mello CC, Pellizzer EP, Zavanelli AC; Regeneração óssea guiada em implantodontia: relato de caso ; RFO, Passo Fundo, 2014, v. 19, n. 1, p. 121-128.
  10. Tahmaseb A, WU V, Wismeijer D, et al. The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res; 2018, 29(Suppl 16):416–35.
  11. Tahmaseb A, Wismeijer D, Coucke W, et al. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2014, 29(Suppl):25–42.
  12. Jung RE, Schneider D, Ganeles J, et al. Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2009, 24(Suppl):92–109.
  13. D’haese J, Van De Velde T, Komiyama A, et al. 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; 2012, 14:321–35.
  14. Oh JH, An X, Jeong SM, et al. Digital workflow for computer-guided implant surgery in edentulous patients: a case report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg ; 2017, 75: 2541–9.
  15. El Kholy K, Janner SFM, Schimmel M, et al. The influence of guided sleeve height, drilling distance, and drilling key length on the accuracy of static computerassisted implant surgery. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res; 2019, 21(1):101–7.
  16. Zhou W, Liu Z, Song L, et al. Clinical factors affecting the accuracy of guided implant surgery-a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Evid Based Dent Pract; 2018, 18:28–40.
  17. Raico Gallardo YN, Da Silva-Olivio IRT, Mukai E, et al. Accuracy comparison of guided surgery for dental implants according to the tissue of support: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res;2017, 28:602–12.
  18. Seo C, Juodzbalys G. Accuracy of guided surgery via stereolithographic mucosa-supported surgical guide in implant surgery for edentulous patient: a systematic review. J Oral Maxillofac Res; 2018, 9:e1.
  19. Assetta M, Bellardini M. How much does experience in guided implant surgery play a role in accuracy? A randomized controlled pilot study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2017, 46:922–30.
  20. Rungcharassaeng K, Caruso JM, Kan JY, et al. Accuracy of computer-guided surgery: a comparison of operator experience. J Prosthet Dent; 2015, 114:407–13.
  21. Vescovi P, Campisi G, Fusco V, Mergoni G, Manfredi M, Merigo. Surgery-triggered and non surgery-triggered bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaws (BRONJ): a retro- spective analysis of 567 cases in an Italian multicenter study. Oral Oncol 47:191–194, 2011.
  22. Barreto VC. Avaliação das restaurações atraumáticas em pré-escolares. Dissertação (mestrado)-Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul. Faculdade de odontologia. Porto Alegre, 2007.
  23. Frencken JE, Holmgren CJ. Tratamento restaurador atraumático para a cárie dentária. São Paulo. Santos Editora, 2001.
  24. Asmael HM. Is antral membrane balloon elevation truly minimally invasive technique in sinus floor elevation surgery? A systematic review. Int J Implant Dent. 2018 Apr 17;4(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s40729-018-0123-9. PMID: 29663095; PMCID: PMC5902438.
  25. Pommer B, Busenlechner D, Fürhauser R, Watzek G, Mailath-Pokorny G, Haas R. Trends in techniques to avoid bone augmentation surgery: Application of short implants, narrow-diameter implants and guided surgery. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016 Oct;44(10):1630-1634. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.08.012.
  26. Kernen F, Kramer J, Wanner L, Wismeijer D, Nelson K, Flügge T. A review of virtual planning software for guided implant surgery - data import and visualization, drill guide design and manufacturing. BMC Oral Health. 2020 Sep 10;20(1):251. doi: 10.1186/s12903-020-01208-1. PMID: 32912273; PMCID: PMC7488021.
  27. Thatcher GP, Soukup JW. Virtual Surgical Planning and 3D Printing in Veterinary Dentistry and Oromaxillofacial Surgery. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 2022 Jan;52(1):221-234. doi: 10.1016/j.cvsm.2021.09.009. PMID: 34838251.
  28. Falguière A, LeGruiec C, Herry H, Genest-Beucher S, Dessus JM, Boisramé S. Contribution of virtual reality in oral surgery: A literature review. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021 Sep;122(4):405-410. doi: 10.1016/j.jormas.2021.02.004. Epub 2021 Feb 18. PMID: 33610770.

How to Cite

Ortega, L. F. L., Cicareli, A. J., Kassis, E. N., & Manzini, R. (2022). Virtual and minimally traumatic surgery in bucomaxillofacial procedures: a concise systematic review. MedNEXT Journal of Medical and Health Sciences, 3(S4). https://doi.org/10.54448/mdnt22S403