Navigated Photogrammetry Compared to Standard Stereophotogrammetry

NCT ID: NCT06506747

Last Updated: 2025-06-04

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

4 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2024-07-20

Study Completion Date

2025-05-23

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcome of Navigated Photogrammetry to standard stereophotogrammetry techniques in digital dentistry for the following two parameters:

* The amount of time needed to prepare the provisional digital files for use in the lab, measured in direct doctor interaction time.
* Suitability of delivered provisional occlusion.

Participants will receive either a provisional manufactured by the output of Navigated Photogrammetry, or a provisional manufactured by the output of standard stereophotogrammetry.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Prior to implant surgery, a patient treatment plan is developed using a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), Intra Oral Scan (IOS), or digitized analog records. These records are loaded into a computer-aided design (CAD) program. The individual planning files are all related to one another in one coordinate system. This plan can be used to produce provisional restorations via computer-aided manufacturing (CAM). These files can also be used to implement the plan during surgery using either static guides or dynamic navigation.

Following implant surgery, the final placed implant locations will inherently have some deviation from the plan. It is important for the dentist to understand the physical location of the placed implants to achieve passive fit. In implant dentistry, a "passive fit" refers to the precise alignment and seating of prosthetic components onto dental implants without any internal stress or strain. Achieving a passive fit is crucial for the long-term success and stability of the dental prosthesis.

A potential method to obtain the final implant locations is stereophotogrammetry. Navigated Photogrammetry (NPG) is a new form of stereophotogrammetry which is inherently capable of relating the placed implants to the patient's anatomy using the registration of the Dynamic Surgical Navigation System (DSNS).

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Doctor Efficiency Dental Prosthesis Fit

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

RETROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

FastMap Navigated Photogrammetry

Following implant surgery, the patient will then receive a provisional that was manufactured using the data from FastMap Navigated Photogrammetry.

Navigated Photogrammetry

Intervention Type DEVICE

Navigated Photogrammetry shall be performed following implant surgery, rather than standard stereophotogrammetry. The patient will then receive a provisional that was manufactured using the data from FastMap Navigated Photogrammetry.

Standard Stereophotogrammetry

Following implant surgery, the patient will then receive a provisional that was manufactured using the data from Standard Stereophotogrammetry.

Standard Photogrammetry

Intervention Type DEVICE

The patient will receive the existing patient care protocol that includes anatomy information for the manufacturing of the provisional. Specifically, the patient will receive a preoperative IntraOral Scan (IOS) anatomy scan with IOS-compatible fiducials. Following implant surgery, the patient will receive a scan with a standard stereophotogrammetry device. Additionally, they will receive a post-op alignment IOS with IOS-compatible anatomy fiducials and IOS-compatible implant scan bodies. The patient will then receive a provisional that was manufactured using the data from the standard stereophotogrammetry device.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Navigated Photogrammetry

Navigated Photogrammetry shall be performed following implant surgery, rather than standard stereophotogrammetry. The patient will then receive a provisional that was manufactured using the data from FastMap Navigated Photogrammetry.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Standard Photogrammetry

The patient will receive the existing patient care protocol that includes anatomy information for the manufacturing of the provisional. Specifically, the patient will receive a preoperative IntraOral Scan (IOS) anatomy scan with IOS-compatible fiducials. Following implant surgery, the patient will receive a scan with a standard stereophotogrammetry device. Additionally, they will receive a post-op alignment IOS with IOS-compatible anatomy fiducials and IOS-compatible implant scan bodies. The patient will then receive a provisional that was manufactured using the data from the standard stereophotogrammetry device.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Adult patients requiring dental implant reconstruction who would undergo implant surgery with or without participation in the study.
* The patient must need at least four implants placed in one or both jaws of the maxilla or mandible.
* All patients must undergo informed consent and willingly read, understand, and accept the risks and benefits associated with the study.
* Willingness to participate for the duration of the study of at least six months follow-up
* Is healthy enough to undergo implant surgery. i.e. patient is classified by the American Society of Anesthesiology Scale (ASA) physical status classification status as ASA 1, 2 or 3.
* Ample bone to fully accommodate the implants without impinging on vital structures.

Exclusion Criteria

* Patients who are not candidates for implant placement.
* Children and adolescents under 21 years of age.
* Refusal to sign informed consent.
* Less than four implants need to be restored.
* Severely immunocompromised patients
* Patients undergoing chemotherapy
* Pregnant females.
* Classified by the ASA physical status classification status as ASA \> 3,
* Patient at high risk for medication induced osteonecrosis of the jaw or any other medical condition that would preclude implant placement,
* Any systemic or local disease or condition that would compromise post healing and /or osseointegration.
* Need for systemic corticosteroids or any other medication that would compromise postoperative healing and / or osseointegration.
* Current alcohol or drug abuse.
* Inability or willingness to return for follow-up visits for the period of the study.
Minimum Eligible Age

21 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

X-Nav Technologies, LLC

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Capital Center For Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and For Cosmetic Surgery

Washington D.C., District of Columbia, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Pozzi A, Agliardi E, Lio F, Nagy K, Nardi A, Arcuri L. Accuracy of intraoral optical scan versus stereophotogrammetry for complete-arch digital implant impression: An in vitro study. J Prosthodont Res. 2024 Jan 16;68(1):172-180. doi: 10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_22_00251. Epub 2023 Aug 11.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 37574278 (View on PubMed)

Orejas-Perez J, Gimenez-Gonzalez B, Ortiz-Collado I, Thuissard IJ, Santamaria-Laorden A. In Vivo Complete-Arch Implant Digital Impressions: Comparison of the Precision of Three Optical Impression Systems. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Apr 3;19(7):4300. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19074300.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 35409985 (View on PubMed)

Revilla-Leon M, Att W, Ozcan M, Rubenstein J. Comparison of conventional, photogrammetry, and intraoral scanning accuracy of complete-arch implant impression procedures evaluated with a coordinate measuring machine. J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Mar;125(3):470-478. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.03.005. Epub 2020 May 6.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 32386912 (View on PubMed)

Revilla-Leon M, Rubenstein J, Methani MM, Piedra-Cascon W, Ozcan M, Att W. Trueness and precision of complete-arch photogrammetry implant scanning assessed with a coordinate-measuring machine. J Prosthet Dent. 2023 Jan;129(1):160-165. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.05.019. Epub 2021 Jun 18.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 34154820 (View on PubMed)

Tohme H, Lawand G, Chmielewska M, Makhzoume J. Comparison between stereophotogrammetric, digital, and conventional impression techniques in implant-supported fixed complete arch prostheses: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2023 Feb;129(2):354-362. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.05.006. Epub 2021 Jun 8.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 34112521 (View on PubMed)

Manzella C, Bignardi C, Burello V, Carossa S, Schierano G. Method to improve passive fit of frameworks on implant-supported prostheses: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Jul;116(1):52-8. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.006. Epub 2016 Mar 2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26944406 (View on PubMed)

Jemt T, Hjalmarsson L. In vitro measurements of precision of fit of implant-supported frameworks. A comparison between "virtual" and "physical" assessments of fit using two different techniques of measurements. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 May;14 Suppl 1:e175-82. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00416.x. Epub 2011 Dec 15.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 22171700 (View on PubMed)

Schwarz MS. Mechanical complications of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11 Suppl 1:156-8. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2000.011s1156.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11168264 (View on PubMed)

Related Links

Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.

https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/es/#iso:std:iso:5725:-1:en

Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results-Part 1: General principles and definitions

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

DOC-002105

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Immediate Implant in Posterior Mandible Region
NCT07027904 NOT_YET_RECRUITING NA
Bone Level Tapered Multi-Center Study
NCT02569671 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA