Comparison of Accuracy and Operation Time in Robotic, Dynamic, and Static-Assisted Endodontic Microsurgery: An In Vitro Study.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Chen Chen, Li Qin, Rui Zhang, Liuyan Meng
{"title":"Comparison of Accuracy and Operation Time in Robotic, Dynamic, and Static-Assisted Endodontic Microsurgery: An In Vitro Study.","authors":"Chen Chen, Li Qin, Rui Zhang, Liuyan Meng","doi":"10.1016/j.joen.2024.05.018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study aimed to compare the accuracy and operation time (OT) of robotic-assisted endodontic microsurgery (RA-EMS), dynamic navigation-guided (DN-guided) EMS, and static navigation-guided (SN-guided) EMS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seventy-two teeth from three sets of standardized jaw models (TrueTooth, DELendo, Santa Barbara, CA) randomly assigned into 3 groups underwent osteotomy and root-end resection. Preoperative plans and postoperative cone-beam computed tomography images were imported into an accuracy analysis system and aligned based on the anatomical structures to assess accuracy. The OT was recorded from the moment the foot pedal was pressed down until the bur reached the target depth. Statistical analyses were conducted using Kruskal-Wallis and Scheirer-Ray-Hare tests, with significance set at P < .05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RA-EMS exhibited significantly higher accuracy than DN- and SN-guided EMS in terms of platform, angular, and resection angular deviations (P < .05). Additionally, RA-EMS exhibited significantly higher accuracy than DN-guided EMS in resection length deviation (P < .05). Significant differences were also observed in OTs between the 3 approaches, with SN-guided EMS showing the shortest OT, followed by RA-EMS and DN-guided EMS. Differences in jaw types within the DN-guided EMS group were observed in terms of angular deviation (P < .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All 3 treatment approaches demonstrated acceptable clinical accuracy and OT. RA-EMS exhibited superior accuracy, suggesting its potential application prospects in endodontics. Further high-quality clinical studies are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":15703,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endodontics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2024.05.018","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to compare the accuracy and operation time (OT) of robotic-assisted endodontic microsurgery (RA-EMS), dynamic navigation-guided (DN-guided) EMS, and static navigation-guided (SN-guided) EMS.

Methods: Seventy-two teeth from three sets of standardized jaw models (TrueTooth, DELendo, Santa Barbara, CA) randomly assigned into 3 groups underwent osteotomy and root-end resection. Preoperative plans and postoperative cone-beam computed tomography images were imported into an accuracy analysis system and aligned based on the anatomical structures to assess accuracy. The OT was recorded from the moment the foot pedal was pressed down until the bur reached the target depth. Statistical analyses were conducted using Kruskal-Wallis and Scheirer-Ray-Hare tests, with significance set at P < .05.

Results: RA-EMS exhibited significantly higher accuracy than DN- and SN-guided EMS in terms of platform, angular, and resection angular deviations (P < .05). Additionally, RA-EMS exhibited significantly higher accuracy than DN-guided EMS in resection length deviation (P < .05). Significant differences were also observed in OTs between the 3 approaches, with SN-guided EMS showing the shortest OT, followed by RA-EMS and DN-guided EMS. Differences in jaw types within the DN-guided EMS group were observed in terms of angular deviation (P < .05).

Conclusions: All 3 treatment approaches demonstrated acceptable clinical accuracy and OT. RA-EMS exhibited superior accuracy, suggesting its potential application prospects in endodontics. Further high-quality clinical studies are warranted.

机器人、动态和静态辅助根管显微手术的精确度和操作时间比较:体外研究
导言:本研究旨在比较机器人辅助牙髓显微手术(RA-EMS)、动态导航引导(DN-guided)EMS和静态导航引导(SN-guided)EMS的准确性和手术时间(OT):从三套标准化颌骨模型(TrueTooth, DELendo, Santa Barbara, CA)中随机分配出 72 颗牙齿,分成三组进行截骨术和根端切除术。术前计划和术后锥束计算机断层扫描图像被导入精确度分析系统,并根据解剖结构进行对齐以评估精确度。从踩下脚踏板开始记录 OT,直到钻针到达目标深度。统计分析采用 Kruskal-Wallis 和 Scheirer-Ray-Hare 检验,显著性设定为 p <0.05:在平台偏差、角度偏差和切除角度偏差方面,RA-EMS 的准确性明显高于 DN 和 SN 引导的 EMS(p < 0.05)。此外,在切除长度偏差方面,RA-EMS 的准确性明显高于 DN 引导的 EMS(P < 0.05)。三种方法的OT也存在显著差异,SN引导的EMS显示出最短的OT,其次是RA-EMS和DN引导的EMS。在角度偏差方面,DN引导的EMS组的颌骨类型也存在差异(P < 0.05):所有三种治疗方法都表现出了可接受的临床准确性和 OT。结论:三种治疗方法都表现出了可接受的临床准确性和OT,RA-EMS表现出了更高的准确性,这表明它在牙髓病学中具有潜在的应用前景。有必要进一步开展高质量的临床研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of endodontics
Journal of endodontics 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
224
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Endodontics, the official journal of the American Association of Endodontists, publishes scientific articles, case reports and comparison studies evaluating materials and methods of pulp conservation and endodontic treatment. Endodontists and general dentists can learn about new concepts in root canal treatment and the latest advances in techniques and instrumentation in the one journal that helps them keep pace with rapid changes in this field.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信