Comparative analysis of dental implant placement accuracy: Semi-active robotic versus free-hand techniques: A randomized controlled clinical trial

IF 3.7 2区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research Pub Date : 2024-08-19 DOI:10.1111/cid.13375

Fan Yang, Jianping Chen, Ruijue Cao, Qingwei Tang, Haiyan Liu, Yuchen Zheng, BeiLei Liu, Min Huang, Zhenshi Wang, Yude Ding, Linhong Wang

{"title":"Comparative analysis of dental implant placement accuracy: Semi-active robotic versus free-hand techniques: A randomized controlled clinical trial","authors":"Fan Yang, Jianping Chen, Ruijue Cao, Qingwei Tang, Haiyan Liu, Yuchen Zheng, BeiLei Liu, Min Huang, Zhenshi Wang, Yude Ding, Linhong Wang","doi":"10.1111/cid.13375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Robot-assisted implant surgery has emerged as a novel digital technology, and the accuracy need further assessment.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to compare the accuracy of single dental implant placement between a novel semi-active robot-assisted implant surgery (RAIS) method and the conventional free-hand implant surgery (FHIS) method through a multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients requiring single dental implant placement were recruited and randomized into RAIS and FHIS group. Deviations at the platform, apex, and angle between the planned and final implant positions were assessed in both groups. Additionally, the evaluation of instrument and surgical complications was examined.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 140 patients (median age: 35.35 ± 12.55 years; 43 males, 97 females) with 140 implants from four different research centers were included, with 70 patients (70 implants) in the RAIS group and 70 patients (70 implants) in the FHIS group. In the RAIS and FHIS groups, the median platform deviations were 0.76 ± 0.36 mm and 1.48 ± 0.93 mm, respectively (<i>p</i> < 0.001); median apex deviations were 0.85 ± 0.48 mm and 2.14 ± 1.25 mm, respectively (<i>p</i> < 0.001); and median angular deviations were 2.05 ± 1.33° and 7.36 ± 4.67°, respectively (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Similar significant difference also presented between RAIS and FHIS group in platform vertical/horizontal deviation, apex vertical/horizontal deviation. Additionally, implants with self-tapping characteristics exhibited significantly larger deviations compared with those without self-tapping characteristics in the RAIS group. Both RAIS and FHIS methods demonstrated comparable morbidity and safety pre- and post-operation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The results indicated that the RAIS method demonstrated superior accuracy in single dental implant placement compared with the FHIS method. Specifically, RAIS exhibited significantly smaller deviations in platform, apex, and angular positions, as well as platform and apex vertical/horizontal deviations.</p>\n \n <p>This clinical trial was not registered prior to participant recruitment and randomization. https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=195045.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50679,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","volume":"26 6","pages":"1149-1161"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cid.13375","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.13375","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

Background

Robot-assisted implant surgery has emerged as a novel digital technology, and the accuracy need further assessment.

Purpose

This study aimed to compare the accuracy of single dental implant placement between a novel semi-active robot-assisted implant surgery (RAIS) method and the conventional free-hand implant surgery (FHIS) method through a multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial.

Materials and Methods

Patients requiring single dental implant placement were recruited and randomized into RAIS and FHIS group. Deviations at the platform, apex, and angle between the planned and final implant positions were assessed in both groups. Additionally, the evaluation of instrument and surgical complications was examined.

Results

A total of 140 patients (median age: 35.35 ± 12.55 years; 43 males, 97 females) with 140 implants from four different research centers were included, with 70 patients (70 implants) in the RAIS group and 70 patients (70 implants) in the FHIS group. In the RAIS and FHIS groups, the median platform deviations were 0.76 ± 0.36 mm and 1.48 ± 0.93 mm, respectively (p < 0.001); median apex deviations were 0.85 ± 0.48 mm and 2.14 ± 1.25 mm, respectively (p < 0.001); and median angular deviations were 2.05 ± 1.33° and 7.36 ± 4.67°, respectively (p < 0.001). Similar significant difference also presented between RAIS and FHIS group in platform vertical/horizontal deviation, apex vertical/horizontal deviation. Additionally, implants with self-tapping characteristics exhibited significantly larger deviations compared with those without self-tapping characteristics in the RAIS group. Both RAIS and FHIS methods demonstrated comparable morbidity and safety pre- and post-operation.

Conclusions

The results indicated that the RAIS method demonstrated superior accuracy in single dental implant placement compared with the FHIS method. Specifically, RAIS exhibited significantly smaller deviations in platform, apex, and angular positions, as well as platform and apex vertical/horizontal deviations.

This clinical trial was not registered prior to participant recruitment and randomization. https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=195045.

Abstract Image

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

牙科种植体植入准确性的比较分析：半主动机器人与徒手技术：随机对照临床试验

背景：目的：本研究旨在通过一项多中心、随机对照临床试验，比较新型半主动机器人辅助种植手术（RAIS）方法与传统徒手种植手术（FHIS）方法在单颗牙种植体植入方面的准确性：招募并随机分为 RAIS 组和 FHIS 组。对两组患者计划种植体位置和最终种植体位置之间的平台、顶点和角度偏差进行评估。此外，还对器械和手术并发症进行了评估：共有来自四个不同研究中心的 140 位患者（中位年龄：35.35 ± 12.55 岁；43 位男性，97 位女性）接受了 140 个种植体，其中 RAIS 组和 FHIS 组分别有 70 位患者（70 个种植体）和 70 位患者（70 个种植体）。RAIS 组和 FHIS 组的平台偏差中位数分别为 0.76 ± 0.36 毫米和 1.48 ± 0.93 毫米（P 结论：RAIS 和 FHIS 组的平台偏差中位数分别为 0.76 ± 0.36 毫米和 1.48 ± 0.93 毫米：结果表明，与 FHIS 方法相比，RAIS 方法在单颗牙种植体植入方面表现出更高的准确性。具体而言，RAIS 在平台、顶点和角度位置的偏差，以及平台和顶点的垂直/水平偏差方面都明显较小。该临床试验在参与者招募和随机化之前没有注册。https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=195045。

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分钟内获得全文去求助

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.

期刊最新文献

Issue Information Featured Cover Issue Information Featured Cover Clinical and radiographic changes following transcrestal sinus augmentation: A scoping review of the last 25 years