Maedica · 2026
Robotic Guidance and Optical Navigation for Precision Implant Placement: a Prospective Comparative Clinical Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sabu Ipe Ka, Seethi Fathima, Mary Manju Kb, Mk Faiz, Panikkath Sukesh, Ansari Salman
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Accurate three-dimensional implant positioning is essential for prosthetically driven implant dentistry and for reducing the risk of injury to adjacent anatomical structures.
METHODS: This prospective randomized comparative study included 180 adults requiring single delayed implant placement, who were assigned to robotic-guided (RG) surgery (n=60), optical dynamic navigation-guided (ONG) surgery (n=60), or conventional freehand (CF) surgery (n=60) groups. Preoperative and postoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) datasets were superimposed to measure angular, apical, coronal and depth deviations between planned and actual implant positions. Secondary outcomes included operative time, postoperative pain, six-month satisfaction and early complications.
RESULTS: The final analysis included 176 patients. The mean angular deviation was the lowest in the RG group (1.82°±0.64°), followed by ONG (2.34°±0.89°) and CF groups (4.87°±1.53°; p<0.001). Apical and coronal deviations showed the same pattern. Robotic-guided surgery required longer surgical time than ONG and CF, but early complications were less frequent in RG (3.4%) and ONG (6.8%) than CF (15.5%; p=0.042).
CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of a single-center study and short follow-up, RG achieved the highest placement accuracy, while dynamic optical navigation provided clinically meaningful improvement over freehand placement. Long-term survival, prosthetic outcomes and cost-effectiveness require further evaluation.
METHODS: This prospective randomized comparative study included 180 adults requiring single delayed implant placement, who were assigned to robotic-guided (RG) surgery (n=60), optical dynamic navigation-guided (ONG) surgery (n=60), or conventional freehand (CF) surgery (n=60) groups. Preoperative and postoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) datasets were superimposed to measure angular, apical, coronal and depth deviations between planned and actual implant positions. Secondary outcomes included operative time, postoperative pain, six-month satisfaction and early complications.
RESULTS: The final analysis included 176 patients. The mean angular deviation was the lowest in the RG group (1.82°±0.64°), followed by ONG (2.34°±0.89°) and CF groups (4.87°±1.53°; p<0.001). Apical and coronal deviations showed the same pattern. Robotic-guided surgery required longer surgical time than ONG and CF, but early complications were less frequent in RG (3.4%) and ONG (6.8%) than CF (15.5%; p=0.042).
CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of a single-center study and short follow-up, RG achieved the highest placement accuracy, while dynamic optical navigation provided clinically meaningful improvement over freehand placement. Long-term survival, prosthetic outcomes and cost-effectiveness require further evaluation.