Kareem Mohamed Mohamed El Hossiny, Hala Ahmed Abu El Ela* and Mohamed Wagdy Bissar

Department of Oral Medicine, Periodontology and Oral Diagnosis, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

*Corresponding Author: Hala Ahmed Abu El Ela, Department of Oral Medicine, Periodontology and Oral Diagnosis, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams University, El- Khalyfa El-Mamoun Street, Abbasya, Cairo, Egypt.

Received: May 14, 2026; Published: June 10, 2026

Immediate implant placement has become an important treatment option in contemporary implant dentistry because it can reduce treatment time, preserve the peri-implant soft tissue contour, and improve patient acceptance. However, placing an implant into a fresh extraction socket is technically demanding. The irregular socket anatomy, thin facial plate, and tendency of the drill to deviate toward the path of least resistance may compromise the planned implant position. For this reason, computer-assisted implant surgery has gained increasing importance, particularly in esthetic and anatomically sensitive areas. Static computer-assisted implant surgery uses a preoperatively fabricated surgical guide to transfer the virtual implant plan to the patient, while dynamic navigation provides real-time visual guidance during drilling and implant insertion. Both systems aim to improve the accuracy of implant placement, but each has its own advantages and clinical limitations. Static guides are generally practical, time-efficient, and highly predictable when guide seating is stable. Dynamic navigation, on the other hand, allows intraoperative flexibility, better visual access, and real-time correction of the drilling trajectory. Available evidence suggests that both approaches can achieve clinically acceptable accuracy, although direct comparative evidence in immediate implant placement remains limited. The choice between them should therefore depend not only on radiographic accuracy, but also on case complexity, available support, mouth opening, cost, surgical time, operator experience, and the need for intraoperative modification.

Keyworda: Immediate Implant Placement; Dynamic Navigation; Static Surgical Guide; Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery; Implant Accuracy; Digital Dentistry

References

1. Brånemark PI., et al. “Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period”. Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 16 (1977): 1-132.
2. Buser D., et al. “Modern implant dentistry based on osseointegration: 50 years of progress, current trends and open questions”. Periodontology 2000 1 (2017): 7-21.
3. Garber DA and Belser UC. “Restoration-driven implant placement with restoration-generated site development”. Compendium of Continuing Education in Dentistry 8 (1995): 796-804.
4. Hämmerle CHF., et al. “Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding the placement of implants in extraction sockets”. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 19 (2004): 26-28.
5. Araújo MG and Lindhe J. “Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog”. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 2 (2005): 212-218.
6. Chen ST and Buser D. “Esthetic outcomes following immediate and early implant placement in the anterior maxilla: a systematic review”. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 29 (2014): 186-215.
7. Tyndall DA., et al. “Position statement of the American Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology on selection criteria for the use of radiology in dental implantology with emphasis on cone beam computed tomography”. Journal of Oral Medicine, Oral Surgery, Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology6 (2012): 817-826.
8. Flügge T., et al. “Registration of cone beam computed tomography data and intraoral surface scans: a prerequisite for guided implant surgery with CAD/CAM drilling guides”. Clinical Oral Implants Research 28 (9 (2017): 1113-1118.
9. Tahmaseb A., et al. “The accuracy of static computer-aided implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. Clinical Oral Implants Research 29 (2018): 416-435.
10. D’haese J., et al. “Accuracy and complications using computer-designed stereolithographic surgical guides for oral rehabilitation by means of dental implants: a review of the literature”. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research3 (2012): 321-335.
11. Vercruyssen M., et al. “Guided surgery: accuracy and efficacy”. Periodontology 2000 1 (2014): 228-246.
12. Dawood A., et al. “3D printing in dentistry”. British Dental Journal11 (2015): 521-529.
13. Raico Gallardo YN., et al. “Accuracy comparison of guided surgery for dental implants according to the tissue of support: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. Clinical Oral Implants Research5 (2017): 602-612.
14. Block MS., et al. “Implant placement is more accurate using dynamic navigation”. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery7 (2017): 1377-1386.
15. Stefanelli LV., et al. “Accuracy of a dynamic dental implant navigation system in a private practice”. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants1 (2019): 205-213.
16. Schnutenhaus S., et al. “Accuracy of dynamic computer-assisted implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and in vitro studies”. Journal of Clinical Medicine4 (2021): 704.
17. Battista E., et al. “Dynamic navigation system for immediate implant placement in the maxillary aesthetic region”. Applied Science11 (2022): 5510.
18. Jorba-García A., et al. “Accuracy assessment of dynamic computer-aided implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. Clinical Oral Investigation5 (2021): 2479-2494.
19. Xu Z., et al. “The effect of implant surgery experience on the learning curve of a dynamic navigation system: an in vitro study”. BMC Oral Health 1 (2023): 89.

Citation

Citation: Hala Ahmed Abu El Ela., et al. “Computer-Assisted Immediate Implant Placement: From Static Surgical Guides to Dynamic Navigation: A Mini Review". Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 10.7 (2026): 04-08

Copyright

Copyright: © 2026 Hala Ahmed Abu El Ela., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.