机器人引导的牙科种植体植入与静态引导和动态导航系统的定位精度比较：系统回顾与荟萃分析。

IF 4.3 2区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.02.015

{"title":"机器人引导的牙科种植体植入与静态引导和动态导航系统的定位精度比较：系统回顾与荟萃分析。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.02.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Statement of problem</h3><div>The development of robotic computer assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) offers advantages, but how the positional accuracy of r-CAIS compares with other forms of guided implant surgery remains unclear.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div><span>The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the positional accuracy of r-CAIS and to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with s-CAIS and </span><span>d</span>-CAIS.</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>Five databases were systematically searched by 2 independent reviewers for articles published before May 2023. A manual search was also performed. Articles evaluating the positional accuracy of r-CAIS were included. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for the clinical studies, whereas the QUIN tool was used for the in vitro studies. A meta-analysis was performed to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with <span>d</span>-CAIS.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div><span>Thirteen studies were included, with 9 in vitro studies, 4 clinical studies, and a total of 920 dental implants. A high risk of bias was noted in 6 studies and low to moderate in 7 studies. R-CAIS showed greater accuracy for the coronal, apical, and angular deviations compared with </span><span>d</span>-CAIS. (−0.17 [–0.24, 0.09], (<em>P</em><.001); −0.21 [−0.36, −0.06] (<em>P</em>=.006), and −1.41 [−1.56, −1.26] (<em>P</em><.001))</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>R-CAIS can provide improved positional accuracy compared with <span>d</span>-CAIS when considering coronal, apical, and angular deviations. However, evidence to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with s-CAIS was insufficient. These results should be interpreted with caution because of the limited data and the bias noted in several studies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16866,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the positional accuracy of robotic guided dental implant placement with static guided and dynamic navigation systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.02.015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Statement of problem</h3><div>The development of robotic computer assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) offers advantages, but how the positional accuracy of r-CAIS compares with other forms of guided implant surgery remains unclear.</div></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><div><span>The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the positional accuracy of r-CAIS and to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with s-CAIS and </span><span>d</span>-CAIS.</div></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><div>Five databases were systematically searched by 2 independent reviewers for articles published before May 2023. A manual search was also performed. Articles evaluating the positional accuracy of r-CAIS were included. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for the clinical studies, whereas the QUIN tool was used for the in vitro studies. A meta-analysis was performed to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with <span>d</span>-CAIS.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div><span>Thirteen studies were included, with 9 in vitro studies, 4 clinical studies, and a total of 920 dental implants. A high risk of bias was noted in 6 studies and low to moderate in 7 studies. R-CAIS showed greater accuracy for the coronal, apical, and angular deviations compared with </span><span>d</span>-CAIS. (−0.17 [–0.24, 0.09], (<em>P</em><.001); −0.21 [−0.36, −0.06] (<em>P</em>=.006), and −1.41 [−1.56, −1.26] (<em>P</em><.001))</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>R-CAIS can provide improved positional accuracy compared with <span>d</span>-CAIS when considering coronal, apical, and angular deviations. However, evidence to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with s-CAIS was insufficient. These results should be interpreted with caution because of the limited data and the bias noted in several studies.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16866,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022391324001306\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022391324001306","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

摘要

问题陈述：机器人计算机辅助植入手术（r-CAIS）的发展具有优势，但r-CAIS与其他形式的引导植入手术相比，其定位精度如何仍不清楚。目的：本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估r-CAIS的定位精度，并比较r-CAIS与s-CAIS和d-CAIS的定位精度：由两名独立审稿人系统检索了五个数据库中 2023 年 5 月之前发表的文章。同时还进行了人工检索。纳入了评估 r-CAIS 定位准确性的文章。临床研究采用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具，体外研究采用 QUIN 工具。对 r-CAIS 和 d-CAIS 的定位准确性进行了荟萃分析比较：结果：共纳入 13 项研究，其中包括 9 项体外研究、4 项临床研究和共计 920 个牙科植入体。其中 6 项研究存在高偏倚风险，7 项研究存在低至中度偏倚风险。与 d-CAIS 相比，R-CAIS 在冠状偏差、根尖偏差和角度偏差方面显示出更高的准确性。(-0.17 [-0.24, 0.09], (P

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Comparison of the positional accuracy of robotic guided dental implant placement with static guided and dynamic navigation systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Statement of problem

The development of robotic computer assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) offers advantages, but how the positional accuracy of r-CAIS compares with other forms of guided implant surgery remains unclear.

Purpose

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the positional accuracy of r-CAIS and to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with s-CAIS and d-CAIS.

Material and methods

Five databases were systematically searched by 2 independent reviewers for articles published before May 2023. A manual search was also performed. Articles evaluating the positional accuracy of r-CAIS were included. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for the clinical studies, whereas the QUIN tool was used for the in vitro studies. A meta-analysis was performed to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with d-CAIS.

Results

Thirteen studies were included, with 9 in vitro studies, 4 clinical studies, and a total of 920 dental implants. A high risk of bias was noted in 6 studies and low to moderate in 7 studies. R-CAIS showed greater accuracy for the coronal, apical, and angular deviations compared with d-CAIS. (−0.17 [–0.24, 0.09], (P<.001); −0.21 [−0.36, −0.06] (P=.006), and −1.41 [−1.56, −1.26] (P<.001))

Conclusions

R-CAIS can provide improved positional accuracy compared with d-CAIS when considering coronal, apical, and angular deviations. However, evidence to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with s-CAIS was insufficient. These results should be interpreted with caution because of the limited data and the bias noted in several studies.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

7.00

自引率

13.00%

发文量

599

审稿时长

69 days

期刊介绍： The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is the leading professional journal devoted exclusively to prosthetic and restorative dentistry. The Journal is the official publication for 24 leading U.S. international prosthodontic organizations. The monthly publication features timely, original peer-reviewed articles on the newest techniques, dental materials, and research findings. The Journal serves prosthodontists and dentists in advanced practice, and features color photos that illustrate many step-by-step procedures. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry is included in Index Medicus and CINAHL.