| A |
B |
C |
D |
E |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| SN0 |
Authors |
Year of publica tion |
Type of study |
Primary outcome |
Secondary outcome |
No of implants |
comparison |
System used |
Site operated |
Conclusion |
| 1 |
Sun TM, et al 48
|
Dec 2019 |
Prospecti ve |
Experienc e |
Accuracy |
30 |
Experienced vs inexperienced |
AqNavi system, Taiwan and polarisVic ra optical trackingsystem |
11,17,26,31,36,37region |
1. Accuracy of navigation system not affected by experience2. Navigation system improves the operator accuracy |
| 2 |
Pellegrino G, et al 53
|
Jan 2020 |
prospecti ve – in vitro |
Accuracy |
Operating time, Experience |
112 (28x 4) |
Accuracy in operators with varying levels ofexperience |
ImplaNav,Bresmed ical, Sydney,Australia |
Not specified |
Reliable for both experienced and novice practioners |
| 3 |
Sun TM, et al 17
|
Jan 2018 |
Prospecti ve (in vitro) |
Accuracy |
Learning curve acc tooperatio n site and operatingtime |
150 |
Experienced vs inexperirnced |
AqNavi system, Taiwan |
Specified (6 sites) |
1.The learning curve exhibited a learning plateau after 5 years. 2.Accuracy is same in maxilla andmandible |
| 4 |
Stefanelli L, et al 26
|
Jan 2019 |
retrospec tive |
accuracy |
Impact of various factors on accuracy |
231 |
First 50 implants vs last 50 implants |
Navident, ClaroNav, Toronto, Canada |
Not specified |
1.Dynamic surgical navigation is accurate 2.Accuracy of dynamic navigation improves with experience in thetechnology |
| 5 |
Golob Deeb J, et al 52
|
Nov 2019 |
RCT |
Accuracy |
Surgical time |
70 (14x 5) |
Accuracy of dynamic navigation guided implant among trainees |
Navident dynamic guidance system |
Both anterior and posterior (right and left) |
Dynamic implant can improve implant surgical training in novice population |
