Comparison of dental implant placement accuracy between robotic and static or dynamic computer-assisted surgeries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
J Wang, M Gao, Y Zhao, B Shi, X Wu, Y Zhang, Q Yan
{"title":"Comparison of dental implant placement accuracy between robotic and static or dynamic computer-assisted surgeries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"J Wang, M Gao, Y Zhao, B Shi, X Wu, Y Zhang, Q Yan","doi":"10.4317/medoral.27132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (rCAIS) has been developed to enhance implant placement accuracy compared to static (sCAIS) and dynamic (dCAIS) computer-assisted implant surgeries. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and compare the accuracy of rCAIS to other CAIS approaches.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and CNKI up to September 2024. Additionally, a manual search of relevant journals and reference lists was performed. Clinical and preclinical studies comparing rCAIS with sCAIS or dCAIS were included. Primary outcomes were global platform deviation, global apex deviation, and angular deviation between planned and actual implant positions. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias using RoB 2 for randomized trials, the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies, the SYRCLE tool for animal studies, and the QUIN tool for in vitro studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. In clinical studies, rCAIS (157 implants) demonstrated significantly lower deviations compared to sCAIS (166 implants): Global platform MD=-0.73mm (95% CI: -1.00 to -0.45; p<0.00001), apex deviation MD=-0.84mm (95% CI: -1.12 to -0.56; p<0.00001), and angular deviation MD=-1.51° (95% CI: -2.71 to -0.32; p=0.01). In preclinical studies, rCAIS also outperformed dCAIS (both 270 implants): Platform deviation MD=-0.15mm (95% CI: -0.24 to -0.07; p=0.0002), apex deviation MD=-0.19mm (95% CI: -0.27 to -0.10; p<0.0001), and angular deviation MD=-1.03° (95% CI: -1.70 to -0.37; p=0.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>rCAIS demonstrates superior accuracy compared to sCAIS or dCAIS. However, the magnitude of observed differences is small, and thus the improvements may not be clinically relevant despite the statistical significance. Further well-designed and large-scale studies are warranted to explore the influencing factors and optimize the clinical application of rCAIS.</p>","PeriodicalId":49016,"journal":{"name":"Medicina Oral Patologia Oral Y Cirugia Bucal","volume":" ","pages":"e1-e10"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12743385/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina Oral Patologia Oral Y Cirugia Bucal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.27132","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (rCAIS) has been developed to enhance implant placement accuracy compared to static (sCAIS) and dynamic (dCAIS) computer-assisted implant surgeries. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and compare the accuracy of rCAIS to other CAIS approaches.

Material and methods: Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and CNKI up to September 2024. Additionally, a manual search of relevant journals and reference lists was performed. Clinical and preclinical studies comparing rCAIS with sCAIS or dCAIS were included. Primary outcomes were global platform deviation, global apex deviation, and angular deviation between planned and actual implant positions. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias using RoB 2 for randomized trials, the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies, the SYRCLE tool for animal studies, and the QUIN tool for in vitro studies.

Results: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. In clinical studies, rCAIS (157 implants) demonstrated significantly lower deviations compared to sCAIS (166 implants): Global platform MD=-0.73mm (95% CI: -1.00 to -0.45; p<0.00001), apex deviation MD=-0.84mm (95% CI: -1.12 to -0.56; p<0.00001), and angular deviation MD=-1.51° (95% CI: -2.71 to -0.32; p=0.01). In preclinical studies, rCAIS also outperformed dCAIS (both 270 implants): Platform deviation MD=-0.15mm (95% CI: -0.24 to -0.07; p=0.0002), apex deviation MD=-0.19mm (95% CI: -0.27 to -0.10; p<0.0001), and angular deviation MD=-1.03° (95% CI: -1.70 to -0.37; p=0.002).

Conclusions: rCAIS demonstrates superior accuracy compared to sCAIS or dCAIS. However, the magnitude of observed differences is small, and thus the improvements may not be clinically relevant despite the statistical significance. Further well-designed and large-scale studies are warranted to explore the influencing factors and optimize the clinical application of rCAIS.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

机器人与静态或动态计算机辅助手术的牙种植体放置准确性比较:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:与静态(sCAIS)和动态(dCAIS)计算机辅助种植手术相比,机器人计算机辅助种植手术(rCAIS)的发展提高了种植体放置的准确性。本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是评估和比较rCAIS与其他CAIS方法的准确性。材料与方法:截止2024年9月在PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library和CNKI进行电子检索。此外,还进行了相关期刊和参考文献列表的人工检索。包括比较rCAIS与sCAIS或dCAIS的临床和临床前研究。主要结果是整体平台偏差,整体尖端偏差,以及计划和实际种植体位置之间的角度偏差。两名独立审稿人提取数据并评估偏倚风险,随机试验使用RoB 2,非随机研究使用ROBINS-I工具,动物研究使用sycle工具,体外研究使用QUIN工具。结果:11项研究符合纳入标准。在临床研究中,rCAIS(157个植入物)与sCAIS(166个植入物)相比显示出明显更低的偏差:全球平台MD=-0.73mm (95% CI: -1.00至-0.45);结论:rCAIS与sCAIS或dCAIS相比具有更高的准确性。然而,观察到的差异幅度很小,因此尽管有统计学意义,但这些改善可能不具有临床相关性。需要进一步精心设计和大规模的研究来探索rCAIS的影响因素并优化其临床应用。
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
Medicina Oral Patologia Oral Y Cirugia Bucal
Medicina Oral Patologia Oral Y Cirugia Bucal DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: 1. Oral Medicine and Pathology: Clinicopathological as well as medical or surgical management aspects of diseases affecting oral mucosa, salivary glands, maxillary bones, as well as orofacial neurological disorders, and systemic conditions with an impact on the oral cavity. 2. Oral Surgery: Surgical management aspects of diseases affecting oral mucosa, salivary glands, maxillary bones, teeth, implants, oral surgical procedures. Surgical management of diseases affecting head and neck areas. 3. Medically compromised patients in Dentistry: Articles discussing medical problems in Odontology will also be included, with a special focus on the clinico-odontological management of medically compromised patients, and considerations regarding high-risk or disabled patients. 4. Implantology 5. Periodontology
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书