Trueness and precision of immediate implant placement using dynamic and robotic computer-assisted techniques at the mandibular molar site: An in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare the trueness and precision of mandibular molar immediate implant placement (IIP) between dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (dCAIS) and robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (rCAIS).

METHODS

Ten mandibular models with 40 implant sites, consisting of two types of molar extraction sockets (type B: multiple roots with septal bone; type C: single root without septal bone), were divided into the dCAIS group and the rCAIS group for IIP. The pre- and post-operative CBCT were compared, and the trueness of the implants was measured and statistically analyzed. Precision was evaluated using the Levene test (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between dCAIS and rCAIS in 3D or angular deviations. For trueness, the two groups were comparable (p > 0.05) except that rCAIS performed better in the buccolingual dimension (p = 0.003 at the crest and apex) in type C sockets. For precision, Levene's tests (α = 0.05) showed that dCAIS had significantly better precision across all sockets in the apicocoronal direction (p = 0.009 at the crest, p = 0.022 at the apex) and in the mesiodistal direction at the apex (p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Both dCAIS and rCAIS achieved high trueness and precision for molar IIP. rCAIS achieved higher buccolingual trueness in type C sockets, whereas dCAIS provided greater precision.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Both dynamic navigation and robotic-assisted systems achieve high accuracy in mandibular molar immediate implant placement. While rCAIS has an advantage in challenging type C sockets, dCAIS requires intentional adjustment in directions with uneven resistance to achieve optimal outcomes.