Affiliation:
1. Department of Second Dental Center, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine Shanghai China
2. College of Stomatology Shanghai Jiao Tong University Shanghai China
3. National Center for Stomatology Shanghai China
4. National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases Shanghai China
5. Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology Shanghai China
Abstract
AbstractObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of dental implant placement in a single tooth gap, including the postextraction site and healed site, using a task‐autonomous robotic system and a dynamic navigation system.Materials and MethodsForty partially edentulous models requiring both immediate and conventional implant placement were randomly divided into a robotic system group and a navigation system group. The coronal, apical, and angular deviations of the implants were measured and assessed between the groups.ResultsThe deviations in immediate implant placement were compared between the robotic system and dynamic navigation system groups, showing a mean (±SD) coronal deviation of 0.86 ± 0.36 versus 0.70 ± 0.21 mm (p = .101), a mean apical deviation of 0.77 ± 0.34 versus 0.95 ± 0.38 mm (p = .127), and a mean angular deviation of 1.94 ± 0.66° versus 3.44 ± 1.38° (p < .001). At the healed site, significantly smaller coronal deviation (0.46 ± 0.29 vs. 0.70 ± 0.30 mm, p = .005), apical deviation (0.56 ± 0.30 vs. 0.85 ± 0.25 mm, p < .001), and angular deviation (1.36 ± 0.54 vs. 1.80 ± 0.70 mm, p = .034) were found in the robotic system group than in the dynamic navigation group.ConclusionsThe position in both immediate and conventional implant placement was more precise with the task‐autonomous robotic system than with the dynamic navigation system. Its performance in actual clinical applications should be confirmed in further trials.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献