Alessandro Pozzi, Paolo Carosi, Claudia Lorenzi, James Chow, Hom-Lay Wang, German O Gallucci
{"title":"In Vivo Accuracy of Autonomous Dental Implant Robotic Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Alessandro Pozzi, Paolo Carosi, Claudia Lorenzi, James Chow, Hom-Lay Wang, German O Gallucci","doi":"10.11607/jomi.11238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To systematically analyze the accuracy of autonomous dental implant robotic (ADIR) surgery for dental implant placement.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched on February 21, 2024. Any clinical studies, with the exception of case reports, assessing ADIR accuracy by superimposing preoperative digital planning with postoperative CBCT images were included. The risk of bias was assessed, and a meta-analysis was performed using a random-effect model to evaluate linear and angular deviations between planned and placed implants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from six clinical studies reporting ADIR accuracy in 96 patients with 299 dental implants were included (102 implants in 69 partially edentulous patients, 197 implants in 27 complete-arch scenarios). The meta analysis at the implant level reported a mean overall accuracy of ADIR of 0.60 mm (95% CI [0.5133; 0.6965]) at the platform and 0.63 mm (95% CI [0.5663; 0.6909]) at the apex and 1.242 degrees (95% CI [1.2182; 1.6320]) of angular deviation. ADIR accuracy resulted in significantly higher values than static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Within the limitations of this review, ADIR surgery has shown to be feasible for placing implants in both partially and completely edentulous patients, achieving consistent mean linear and angular deviations of approximately 0.6 mm and 1.40 degrees, respectively. However, clinical practicality of ADIR surgery remains cumbersome, with well-trained operators needed to plan and assist ADIR procedures as well as a technical expert providing backup control.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.11238","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To systematically analyze the accuracy of autonomous dental implant robotic (ADIR) surgery for dental implant placement.
Materials and methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched on February 21, 2024. Any clinical studies, with the exception of case reports, assessing ADIR accuracy by superimposing preoperative digital planning with postoperative CBCT images were included. The risk of bias was assessed, and a meta-analysis was performed using a random-effect model to evaluate linear and angular deviations between planned and placed implants.
Results: Data from six clinical studies reporting ADIR accuracy in 96 patients with 299 dental implants were included (102 implants in 69 partially edentulous patients, 197 implants in 27 complete-arch scenarios). The meta analysis at the implant level reported a mean overall accuracy of ADIR of 0.60 mm (95% CI [0.5133; 0.6965]) at the platform and 0.63 mm (95% CI [0.5663; 0.6909]) at the apex and 1.242 degrees (95% CI [1.2182; 1.6320]) of angular deviation. ADIR accuracy resulted in significantly higher values than static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery.
Conclusions: Within the limitations of this review, ADIR surgery has shown to be feasible for placing implants in both partially and completely edentulous patients, achieving consistent mean linear and angular deviations of approximately 0.6 mm and 1.40 degrees, respectively. However, clinical practicality of ADIR surgery remains cumbersome, with well-trained operators needed to plan and assist ADIR procedures as well as a technical expert providing backup control.
目的:系统分析自主种植机器人(ADIR)在种植体植入中的准确性。材料和方法:检索于2024年2月21日PubMed, Embase和Cochrane CENTRAL。除病例报告外,所有通过术前数字计划与术后CBCT叠加评估ADIR准确性的临床研究均被纳入。评估偏倚风险,并使用随机效应模型进行meta分析,以评估计划植入物和放置植入物之间的线性和角度偏差。结果:来自6项临床研究的数据报告了96例患者299颗种植体的ADIR准确性(102例在69颗部分牙齿中,197例在27颗全牙弓中)。种植体水平的meta分析报告ADIR的平均总体准确度为0.60 mm, 95% CI [0.5133;0.6965]平台,0.63 mm 95% CI [0.5663;0.6909°,95% CI为1.242°[1.2182;1.6320]的角偏差。ADIR的准确度显著高于s-和d-CAIS。结论:在本综述的局限性内,自主种植机器人手术已被证明在部分和完全无牙患者中放置种植体是可行的,平均线性和角度偏差分别约为0.6 mm和1.40°。然而,自主牙种植机器人手术的临床实用性仍然很麻烦,需要训练有素的操作员计划和协助ADIR程序,并需要技术专家提供备份控制。