4.5 Article

Accuracy of implant placement via dynamic navigation and autonomous robotic computer-assisted implant surgery methods: A retrospective study

期刊

CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/clr.14216

关键词

accuracy; dental implant; dynamic navigation system; robot-assisted surgery; visual analogue scale

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared the deviations between implant planning and placement using dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (d-CAIS) and autonomous robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) methods. The results showed that r-CAIS achieved more accurate implant placement compared to d-CAIS, with no significant difference in patient satisfaction between the two groups.
Objective: Optimal implant planning and placement allows the prosthesis to be well designed to achieve a satisfactory aesthetic and functional outcome. We aimed to compare deviations between implant planning and placement with the assistance of dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (d-CAIS) or autonomous robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) methods in a clinical setting. Methods: The retrospective analysis of medical records between 2021 July and 2022 December was conducted to compare the implantation accuracy of the d-CAIS and r-CAIS system in partially edentulous patients through cone-beam computed tomography. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to check the data distribution. Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test was used as appropriate, with a defined significant difference (p < .05).Results: Seventy-seven patients were analysed (124 implants), with 38 patients (62 implants) in the d-CAIS group and 39 patients (62 implants) in the r-CAIS group. The differences between d-CAIS and r-CAIS were 4.09 +/- 1.79 degrees versus 1.37 +/- 0.92 degrees (p < .001) in angular deviation; 1.25 +/- 0.54 versus 0.68 +/- 0.36 mm (p < .001) in coronal global deviation; 1.39 +/- 0.52 versus 0.69 +/- 0.36 mm (p < .001) in apical global deviation; the results of the PROMs showed no statistical difference between the two groups.Conclusions: r-CAIS allows more accurate implant placement than the d-CAIS technology. And both groups achieved overall satisfactory outcomes via VAS (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2300072004).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据