The development of dynamic navigation system (DNS) has facilitated the development of modern digital medicine. In the field of dentistry, the cutting-edge technology is garnering widespread recognition. Based on the principles of 3-dimensional visualization, virtual design, and precise motion tracking, DNS is mainly composed of a computer, a tracking system, specialized tracer instruments, and navigation software. DNS employs a workflow that begins with preoperative data acquisition and imaging data reconstruction, followed by surgical instrument calibration and spatial registration, culminating in real-time guided operations. Currently, the system has been applied in a broad spectrum of dental procedures, encompassing dental implants, oral and maxillofacial surgery (such as tooth extraction, the treatment of maxillofacial fractures, tumors, and foreign bodies, orthognathic surgery, and temporomandibular joint ankylosis surgery), intraosseous anesthesia, and endodontic treatment (including root canal therapy and endodontic surgery). These applications benefit from its enhancements in direct visualization, treatment precision, efficiency, safety, and procedural adaptability. However, the adoption of DNS is not without substantial upfront costs, required comprehensive training, additional preparatory time, and increased radiation exposure. Despite challenges, the ongoing advancements in DNS are poised to broaden its utility and substantially strengthen digital dentistry.
AfrashtehfarKIJuradoCAMoshaveriniaA.2022. Dynamic navigation may be used for most implant surgery scenarios due to its satisfactory accuracy. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 22(4):101797.
2.
AzarmehrIStokbroKBellRBThygesenT.2017. Surgical navigation: a systematic review of indications, treatments, and outcomes in oral and maxillofacial surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 75(9):1987–2005.
3.
Bardales-AlcocerJRamírez-SalomónMVega-LizamaELópez-VillanuevaMAlvarado-CárdenasGSerotaKSRamírez-WongJ.2021. Endodontic retreatment using dynamic navigation: a case report. J Endod. 47(6):1007–1013.
4.
BergerMNovaIKallusSRistowOEisenmannUDickhausHEngelMFreudlspergerCHoffmannJSeebergerR.2018. Electromagnetic navigated condylar positioning after high oblique sagittal split osteotomy of the mandible: a guided method to attain pristine temporomandibular joint conditions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 125(5):407–414.e1.
5.
BergeronLBouchardSBonapace-PotvinMBergeronF.2019. Intraoperative surgical navigation reduces the surgical time required to treat acute major facial fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg. 144(4):923–931.
6.
BlockMS. 2023. How to avoid errors when using navigation to place implants—a narrative review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 81(3):299–307.
7.
BlockMSEmeryRWLankKRyanJ.2017. Implant placement accuracy using dynamic navigation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 32(1):92–99.
8.
CassettaMBellardiniM.2017. How much does experience in guided implant surgery play a role in accuracy? A randomized controlled pilot study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 46(7):922–930.
9.
ChenCSunNJiangCLiuYSunJ.2021. Accurate transfer of bimaxillary orthognathic surgical plans using computer-aided intraoperative navigation. Korean J Orthod. 51(5):321–328.
10.
ChongBSDhesiMMakdissiJ.2019. Computer-aided dynamic navigation: a novel method for guided endodontics. Quintessence Int. 50(3):196–202.
11.
ConnertTLeontievWDagassan-BerndtDKühlSElAyoutiAKrugRKrastlGWeigerR.2021. Real-time guided endodontics with a miniaturized dynamic navigation system versus conventional freehand endodontic access cavity preparation: substance loss and procedure time. J Endod. 47(10):1651–1656.
12.
D’HaeseJAckhurstJWismeijerDDe BruynHTahmasebA.2017. Current state of the art of computer-guided implant surgery. Periodontol2000. 73(1):121–133.
13.
DianatOGuptaSPriceJBMostoufiB.2021. Guided endodontic access in a maxillary molar using a dynamic navigation system. J Endod. 47(4):658–662.
14.
DianatONosratAMostoufiBPriceJBGuptaSMartinhoFC. 2021. Accuracy and efficiency of guided root-end resection using a dynamic navigation system: a human cadaver study. Int Endod J. 54(5):793–801.
15.
DouglasMJCallcutRCeliLAMerchantN.2023. Interpretation and use of applied/operational machine learning and artificial intelligence in surgery. Surg Clin North Am. 103(2):317–333.
16.
EmeryRWKorjOAgarwalR.2017. A review of in-office dynamic image navigation for extraction of complex mandibular third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 75(8):1591–1600.
17.
FuWChenCBianZMengL.2022. Endodontic microsurgery of posterior teeth with the assistance of dynamic navigation technology: a report of three cases. J Endod. 48(7):943–950.
18.
GambariniGGalliMMoreseAStefanelliLVAbduljabbarFGiovarruscioMDi NardoDSeracchianiMTestarelliL.2020. Precision of dynamic navigation to perform endodontic ultraconservative access cavities: a preliminary in vitro analysis. J Endod. 46(9):1286–1290.
19.
GambariniGGalliMStefanelliLVDi NardoDMoreseASeracchianiMDe AngelisFDi CarloSTestarelliL.2019. Endodontic microsurgery using dynamic navigation system: a case report. J Endod. 45(11):1397–1402.e6.
20.
Gargallo-AlbiolJBarootchiSSalomó-CollOWangHL. 2019. Advantages and disadvantages of implant navigation surgery. A systematic review. Ann Anat. 225:1–10.
21.
GongXHeYAnJYangYHuangXLiuMZhaoYZhangY.2017. Application of a computer-assisted navigation system (CANS) in the delayed treatment of zygomatic fractures: a randomized controlled trial. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 75(7):1450–1463.
22.
GröbeAWeberCSchmelzleRHeilandMKlattJPohlenzP.2009. The use of navigation (BrainLAB Vector vision2) and intraoperative 3D imaging system (Siemens Arcadis Orbic 3D) in the treatment of gunshot wounds of the maxillofacial region. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 13(3):153–158.
23.
GroenHCden HartogAGHeerinkWJKuhlmannKFDKokNFMvan VeenRHiepMAJSnaebjornssonPGrotenhuisBABeetsGL, et al. 2022. Use of image-guided surgical navigation during resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer. Life (Basel). 12(5):645.
24.
GuoYXuDDLvKWanQLLiZBLiZ.2016. Use of computer-assisted navigation in the retrieval of accidentally displaced third molars. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 74(5):889–894.
25.
HeYHuangTZhangYAnJHeL.2017. Application of a computer-assisted surgical navigation system in temporomandibular joint ankylosis surgery: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 46(2):189–197.
26.
JainSDCarricoCKBermanisI.2020. 3-dimensional accuracy of dynamic navigation technology in locating calcified canals. J Endod. 46(6):839–845.
27.
JainSDCarricoCKBermanisIRehilS.2020. Intraosseous anesthesia using dynamic navigation technology. J Endod. 46(12):1894–1900.
28.
JanabiATordikPAGriffinILMostoufiBPriceJBChandPMartinhoFC. 2021. Accuracy and efficiency of 3-dimensional dynamic navigation system for removal of fiber post from root canal-treated teeth. J Endod. 47(9):1453–1460.
29.
JodaTZitzmannNU. 2022. Personalized workflows in reconstructive dentistry-current possibilities and future opportunities. Clin Oral Investig. 26(6):4283–4290.
30.
LartizienRZaccariaINoyellesLBettegaG.2020. Improvement in accuracy of maxillary repositioning of Le Fort I osteotomy with Orthopilot™ navigation system: evaluation of 30 patients. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 58(9):1116–1122.
31.
LiPLiZTianWTangW.2015. A strategy for removal of foreign body in mandible with navigation system. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 44(7):885–888.
32.
LuYJChiuLHTsaiLYFangCY. 2022. Dynamic navigation optimizes endodontic microsurgery in an anatomically challenging area. J Dent Sci. 17(1):580–582.
33.
MartinhoFCAldahmashSACahillTYGuptaSDianatOMostoufiBPriceJBGriffinITordikPA. 2022. Comparison of the accuracy and efficiency of a 3-dimensional dynamic navigation system for osteotomy and root-end resection performed by novice and experienced endodontists. J Endod. 48(10):1327–1333.e1.
34.
MiyazakiRIwasakiANakaiFMiyakeM.2021. Surgical navigation system for temporomandibular joint ankylosis in a child: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 15(1):464.
35.
NeuhausMTZellerANJehnPLethausBGellrichNCZimmererRM. 2021. Intraoperative real-time navigation and intraoperative three-dimensional imaging for patient-specific total temporomandibular joint replacement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 50(10):1342–1350.
36.
PelanisETeatiniAEiglBRegensburgerAAlzagaAKumarRPRudolphTAghayanDLRiedigerCKvarnströmN, et al. 2021. Evaluation of a novel navigation platform for laparoscopic liver surgery with organ deformation compensation using injected fiducials. Med Image Anal. 69:101946.
37.
PellegrinoGBelliniPCavalliniPFFerriAZacchinoATaraschiVMarchettiCConsoloU.2020. Dynamic navigation in dental implantology: the influence of surgical experience on implant placement accuracy and operating time. An in vitro study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 17(6):2153.
38.
PowcharoenWYangWFYan LiKZhuWSuYX. 2019. Computer-assisted versus conventional freehand mandibular reconstruction with fibula free flap: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 144(6):1417–1428.
39.
PozziAArcuriLKanJLondonoJ.2022. Navigation guided socket-shield technique for implant and pontic sites in the esthetic zone: a proof-of-concept 1-year prospective study with immediate implant placement and loading. J Esthet Restor Dent. 34(1):203–214.
40.
Ranz-ColioÁAlmeida-ParraFDe Leyva-MorenoPCárdenas-SerresCGarcía-CosíoMAcero-SanzJ. 2023. Navigation-guided resection of locally advanced midface malignancies. Does it improve the safety of oncologic resection?Oral Oncol. 143:106455.
RetanaAEmeryRWKeirV.2019. Removal of impacted supernumerary teeth using a dynamic surgical navigation system: a case report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 77(6):1130–1134.
43.
RobertsDWStrohbehnJWHatchJFMurrayWKettenbergerH.1986. A frameless stereotaxic integration of computerized tomographic imaging and the operating microscope. J Neurosurg. 65(4):545–549.
44.
SchmelzeisenRGellrichNCSchrammASchönROttenJE. 2002. Navigation-guided resection of temporomandibular joint ankylosis promotes safety in skull base surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 60(11):1275–1283.
45.
SohHYSunQHuLHWangYMaoCPengXZhangWB. 2022. Accuracy of globe-sparing orbital reconstruction using individually bent titanium mesh: a comparative study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 75(6):1971–1978.
46.
SozziDFilippiACanziGDe PontiEBozzettiANovelliG.2022. Surgical navigation in mandibular reconstruction: accuracy evaluation of an innovative protocol. J Clin Med. 11(7):2060.
47.
StefanelliLVDeGrootBSLiptonDIMandelarisGA. 2019. Accuracy of a dynamic dental implant navigation system in a private practice. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 34(1):205–213.
48.
TangWJiangH.2023. Comparison of static and dynamic navigation in root end resection performed by experienced and inexperienced operators: an in vitro study. J Endod. 49(3):294–300.
49.
TzelnickSRampinelliVSahovalerAFranzLChanHHLDalyMJIrishJC.2023. Skull-base surgery-a narrative review on current approaches and future developments in surgical navigation. J Clin Med. 12(7):2706.
50.
WangHChiYHuangHSuSXueHHouJ.2022. Combined use of 3D printing and computer-assisted navigation in the clinical treatment of multiple maxillofacial fractures. Asian J Surg. 46(6):2284–2292.
51.
WangJCuiNHGuoYJZhangW.2017. Navigation-guided extraction of impacted supernumerary teeth: a case report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 75(6):1136.e1–1136.e5.
52.
WangJZhangWWuSSGuoCBCuiNH. 2021. Navigation in bone-impacted premaxillary supernumerary tooth removal: a preliminary clinical trial. Int J Comput Dent. 24(4):363–374.
53.
WangLCLeeYHTsaiCYWuTJTengYYLaiJPLinSSChangYJ. 2021. Postsurgical stability of temporomandibular joint of skeletal class III patients treated with 2-jaw orthognathic surgery via computer-aided three-dimensional simulation and navigation in orthognathic surgery (CASNOS). Biomed Res Int. 2021:1563551.
54.
WangXShujaatSMeeusJShaheenELegrandPLahoudPGerhardtMDNJacobsR.2023. Performance of novice versus experienced surgeons for dental implant placement with freehand, static guided and dynamic navigation approaches. Sci Rep. 13(1):2598.
55.
WangXYLiuLGuanMSLiuQZhaoTLiHB. 2022. The accuracy and learning curve of active and passive dynamic navigation-guided dental implant surgery: an in vitro study. J Dent. 124:104240.
56.
WuMLiuMChengYTangWYanPJiangH.2022. Treatment of pulp canal obliteration using a dynamic navigation system: two case reports. J Endod. 48(11):1441–1446.
57.
YimarjPSubbalekhaKDhanesuanKSiriwatanaKMattheosNPimkhaokhamA.2020. Comparison of the accuracy of implant position for two-implants supported fixed dental prosthesis using static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 22(6):672–678.
58.
YotpibulwongTArunjaroensukSKaboosayaBSinpitaksakulPArksornnukitMMattheosNPimkhaokhamA.2023. Accuracy of implant placement with a combined use of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in single tooth space: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 34(4):330–341.
59.
ZhangCWuJYangCLiuNHuiWZhangYZhangS.2020. New solutions to improve the accuracy of the navigation-guided foreign body removal in craniomaxillofacial deep space. J Craniofac Surg. 31(6):e577–e580.
60.
ZongCLShiYLJiaJQDingMCChangSPLuJBChenYLTianL.2021. A retrospective study to compare the treatment outcomes with and without surgical navigation for fracture of the orbital wall. Chin J Traumatol. 24(1):11–17.
