Comparison of Accuracy and Systematic Precision Between Autonomous Dental Robot and Static Guide: A Retrospective Study

IF 3.7 2区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research Pub Date : 2025-06-05 DOI:10.1111/cid.70050

Na Chen, Yuanyuan Wang, Huawei Zou, Yu Chen, Yuanding Huang

{"title":"Comparison of Accuracy and Systematic Precision Between Autonomous Dental Robot and Static Guide: A Retrospective Study","authors":"Na Chen, Yuanyuan Wang, Huawei Zou, Yu Chen, Yuanding Huang","doi":"10.1111/cid.70050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to compare the implant placement accuracy and systematic precision between Robotic-Assisted Implant Surgery (RAIS) and Fully Guided Static Computer-Assisted Implant surgery (sCAIS), as well as to explore factors influencing implant placement accuracy.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients who underwent digital guided implant surgery between October 2022 and July 2024 were included in this study. The patients were divided into the RAIS and sCAIS groups. Post-operative CBCT scans were performed to measure three-dimensional (3D) deviations and overlap rate (OR) of each implant. The differences in 3D deviations and OR between the two CAIS methods were analyzed, along with factors that could impact implant accuracy, such as anterior versus posterior sites, maxilla versus mandible, bone defects, implant morphology, and free-end sites.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>254 patients were enrolled, with 125 patients receiving 227 implants in the RAIS group and 129 patients receiving 227 implants in the sCAIS group. The RAIS group demonstrated significantly better performance than the sCAIS group in coronal global deviation (0.69 [0.52] mm vs. 0.97 [0.64] mm), apical global deviation (0.75 [0.57] mm vs. 1.40 [0.82] mm), angular deviation (1.51 [1.43]° vs. 3.44 [2.78]°), and OR (80 [17]% vs. 64 [20]%) (<i>p</i> < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in coronal horizontal mesiodistal deviation at the anterior sites, nor in coronal horizontal mesiodistal and buccolingual deviations at the posterior sites.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>In most edentulous cases, implant placement accuracy assisted by the RAIS system was significantly higher than that of the sCAIS system. The control of Coronal horizontal (mesiodistal) deviation by sCAIS is comparable to that of RAIS. Additionally, the RAIS system demonstrated better systematic precision.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50679,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","volume":"27 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cid.70050","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

Objective

This study aimed to compare the implant placement accuracy and systematic precision between Robotic-Assisted Implant Surgery (RAIS) and Fully Guided Static Computer-Assisted Implant surgery (sCAIS), as well as to explore factors influencing implant placement accuracy.

Materials and Methods

Patients who underwent digital guided implant surgery between October 2022 and July 2024 were included in this study. The patients were divided into the RAIS and sCAIS groups. Post-operative CBCT scans were performed to measure three-dimensional (3D) deviations and overlap rate (OR) of each implant. The differences in 3D deviations and OR between the two CAIS methods were analyzed, along with factors that could impact implant accuracy, such as anterior versus posterior sites, maxilla versus mandible, bone defects, implant morphology, and free-end sites.

Results

254 patients were enrolled, with 125 patients receiving 227 implants in the RAIS group and 129 patients receiving 227 implants in the sCAIS group. The RAIS group demonstrated significantly better performance than the sCAIS group in coronal global deviation (0.69 [0.52] mm vs. 0.97 [0.64] mm), apical global deviation (0.75 [0.57] mm vs. 1.40 [0.82] mm), angular deviation (1.51 [1.43]° vs. 3.44 [2.78]°), and OR (80 [17]% vs. 64 [20]%) (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in coronal horizontal mesiodistal deviation at the anterior sites, nor in coronal horizontal mesiodistal and buccolingual deviations at the posterior sites.

Conclusion

In most edentulous cases, implant placement accuracy assisted by the RAIS system was significantly higher than that of the sCAIS system. The control of Coronal horizontal (mesiodistal) deviation by sCAIS is comparable to that of RAIS. Additionally, the RAIS system demonstrated better systematic precision.

查看原文本刊更多论文

自主式牙科机器人与静态导向器精度及系统精度比较的回顾性研究

目的比较机器人辅助种植手术（RAIS）和全引导静态计算机辅助种植手术（sCAIS）的种植体放置精度和系统精度，并探讨影响种植体放置精度的因素。材料与方法本研究纳入2022年10月至2024年7月期间接受数字引导种植手术的患者。患者分为RAIS组和sCAIS组。术后进行CBCT扫描，测量每个种植体的三维（3D）偏差和重叠率（OR）。分析了两种CAIS方法在3D偏差和OR方面的差异，以及影响种植体准确性的因素，如前牙与后牙、上颌骨与下颌骨、骨缺损、种植体形态和游离端位置。结果纳入254例患者，RAIS组125例患者接受227颗种植体，sCAIS组129例患者接受227颗种植体。RAIS组在冠状面整体偏差（0.69 [0.52]mm vs. 0.97 [0.64] mm）、根尖整体偏差（0.75 [0.57]mm vs. 1.40 [0.82] mm）、角度偏差（1.51[1.43]°vs. 3.44[2.78]°）和OR (80 [20]% vs. 64 [20]%) （p < 0.001）方面的表现明显优于sCAIS组。两组在前位冠状体水平中远端偏差、后位冠状体水平中远端偏差和颊舌偏差均无显著差异。结论在大多数无牙病例中，RAIS系统辅助种植体的植入精度明显高于sCAIS系统。sCAIS对冠状水平（中远端）偏移的控制与RAIS相当。此外，RAIS系统显示出更好的系统精度。

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

Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

6.00

自引率

13.90%

发文量

103

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The goal of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research is to advance the scientific and technical aspects relating to dental implants and related scientific subjects. Dissemination of new and evolving information related to dental implants and the related science is the primary goal of our journal. The range of topics covered by the journals will include but be not limited to: New scientific developments relating to bone Implant surfaces and their relationship to the surrounding tissues Computer aided implant designs Computer aided prosthetic designs Immediate implant loading Immediate implant placement Materials relating to bone induction and conduction New surgical methods relating to implant placement New materials and methods relating to implant restorations Methods for determining implant stability A primary focus of the journal is publication of evidenced based articles evaluating to new dental implants, techniques and multicenter studies evaluating these treatments. In addition basic science research relating to wound healing and osseointegration will be an important focus for the journal.