Scholarlink

Introduction <p>This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of robotic computer-assisted implant surgery in edentulous patients and to compare differences in accuracy between implants placed in the maxilla and mandible, as well as between anterior and posterior regions.</p> Materials and methods <p>Six patients who voluntarily underwent autonomous robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (R-CAIS) using the YaKebot system and met the eligibility criteria were included in this study. Preoperative planning data and postoperative CBCT images were imported into the robotic software system for registration to calculate deviations between the designed and actual implant positions. The primary outcomes included global deviations at the implant platform and apex, angular deviation, as well as horizontal and vertical deviations at the platform and the apex. Deviations were compared among implants placed at different anatomical locations, with <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05 considered statistically significant.</p> Results <p>Six edentulous patients underwent R-CAIS with a total of 42 implants placed. The mean deviation at the implant platform was 0.519 ± 0.216&#xa0;mm, while the mean apex deviation was 0.508 ± 0.224&#xa0;mm. The mean angular deviation was 0.634 ± 0.402°, and the mean vertical deviation was 0.298 ± 0.248&#xa0;mm. The results showed that global deviations at the apex, global angular deviations, and platform vertical deviations tended to be lower in the anterior region than in the posterior region. However, none of these differences reached statistical significance (all <i>p</i>-values <i>&gt;</i> 0.05). Implants in the maxilla exhibited overall smaller deviations than those in the mandible. Notably, the buccolingual deviation at the apex was significantly lower in the maxilla than in the mandible (<i>p</i> = 0.021). No other significant differences were found between the two jaws (all <i>p</i> &gt; 0.05). In terms of deviation direction, the implants tended to deviate toward the buccal and distal directions and were positioned slightly more superficially than designed.</p> Conclusions <p>R-CAIS can achieve high accuracy in implant placement in edentulous patients, supporting its broader clinical application in complex implant rehabilitation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Accuracy of autonomous robotic computer-assisted implant surgery in edentulous patients: a retrospective exploratory case series

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月17日

查看全文
  • Jing Lv,
  • Yingying Zhang,
  • Jia Chen,
  • Qian Han,
  • Zhihong Zhang,
  • Honghong Liu

摘要

Introduction

This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of robotic computer-assisted implant surgery in edentulous patients and to compare differences in accuracy between implants placed in the maxilla and mandible, as well as between anterior and posterior regions.

Materials and methods

Six patients who voluntarily underwent autonomous robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (R-CAIS) using the YaKebot system and met the eligibility criteria were included in this study. Preoperative planning data and postoperative CBCT images were imported into the robotic software system for registration to calculate deviations between the designed and actual implant positions. The primary outcomes included global deviations at the implant platform and apex, angular deviation, as well as horizontal and vertical deviations at the platform and the apex. Deviations were compared among implants placed at different anatomical locations, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.

Results

Six edentulous patients underwent R-CAIS with a total of 42 implants placed. The mean deviation at the implant platform was 0.519 ± 0.216 mm, while the mean apex deviation was 0.508 ± 0.224 mm. The mean angular deviation was 0.634 ± 0.402°, and the mean vertical deviation was 0.298 ± 0.248 mm. The results showed that global deviations at the apex, global angular deviations, and platform vertical deviations tended to be lower in the anterior region than in the posterior region. However, none of these differences reached statistical significance (all p-values > 0.05). Implants in the maxilla exhibited overall smaller deviations than those in the mandible. Notably, the buccolingual deviation at the apex was significantly lower in the maxilla than in the mandible (p = 0.021). No other significant differences were found between the two jaws (all p > 0.05). In terms of deviation direction, the implants tended to deviate toward the buccal and distal directions and were positioned slightly more superficially than designed.

Conclusions

R-CAIS can achieve high accuracy in implant placement in edentulous patients, supporting its broader clinical application in complex implant rehabilitation.