Chen Wei, Al-Taezi Khulood Ali, Chu Catherine Huihan, Shen Yue, Wu Jin, Cai Kunzhan, Chen Peng, Tang Chunbo
Department of Oral Implantology, Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Jiangsu Province Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, Nanjing, China.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2023 Jul;34(7):707-718. doi: 10.1111/clr.14083. Epub 2023 May 11.
This clinical study aimed to assess the accuracy of implant positions using a robotic system in partially edentulous patients.
Twenty-eight partially edentulous patients received 31 implants using the robotic system. Deviations between the planned and placed implants were calculated after surgery. The deviations were compared with objective performance goals (OPGs) from reported studies of fully guided static computer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS) and dynamic CAIS. A multiple linear regression analysis was performed to investigate the possible effects of the type and side of the arch, implant location, and implant dimensions on the deviations.
The evaluation of 31 implants resulted in a mean angle deviation of 2.81 ± 1.13° (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.40-3.23°), while the 3D deviations at the implant shoulder and apex were 0.53 ± 0.23 mm (95% CI 0.45-0.62 mm) and 0.53 ± 0.24 mm (95% CI 0.44-0.61 mm), respectively. The upper limits of the 95% CI of 3D deviations were lower than those of the corresponding OPGs; however, the angle deviation was similar to that of the OPG. No statistically significant differences were found for the type and side of the arch, implant location, and implant dimensions to the deviations (p > .05).
The robotic system appears to achieve higher accuracy in implant positions than static and dynamic CAIS in partially edentulous patients (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2300067587).
本临床研究旨在评估在部分牙列缺损患者中使用机器人系统植入种植体的准确性。
28例部分牙列缺损患者使用机器人系统植入了31颗种植体。术后计算计划植入位置与实际植入位置之间的偏差。将这些偏差与已报道的完全引导静态计算机辅助种植手术(CAIS)和动态CAIS研究中的客观性能目标(OPG)进行比较。进行多元线性回归分析,以研究牙弓类型和侧别、种植体位置以及种植体尺寸对偏差的可能影响。
对31颗种植体的评估结果显示,平均角度偏差为2.81±1.13°(95%置信区间(CI):2.40 - 3.23°),而种植体肩部和根尖处的三维偏差分别为0.53±0.23 mm(95% CI 0.45 - 0.62 mm)和0.53±0.24 mm(95% CI 0.44 - 0.61 mm)。三维偏差95% CI的上限低于相应的OPG;然而,角度偏差与OPG相似。在牙弓类型和侧别、种植体位置以及种植体尺寸对偏差的影响方面,未发现统计学上的显著差异(p>0.05)。
在部分牙列缺损患者中,机器人系统在种植体植入位置上似乎比静态和动态CAIS具有更高的准确性(中国临床试验注册中心ChiCTR2300067587)。