Operative Dentistry and Endodontics, Section of Dentistry, Department of Surgery, Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.
Associate Professor, Operative Dentistry and Endodontics, Section of Dentistry, Department of Surgery, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
J Prosthet Dent. 2024 Oct;132(4):746.e1-746.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.02.015. Epub 2024 Mar 15.
The development of robotic computer assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) offers advantages, but how the positional accuracy of r-CAIS compares with other forms of guided implant surgery remains unclear.
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the positional accuracy of r-CAIS and to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with s-CAIS and d-CAIS.
Five databases were systematically searched by 2 independent reviewers for articles published before May 2023. A manual search was also performed. Articles evaluating the positional accuracy of r-CAIS were included. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used for the clinical studies, whereas the QUIN tool was used for the in vitro studies. A meta-analysis was performed to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with d-CAIS.
Thirteen studies were included, with 9 in vitro studies, 4 clinical studies, and a total of 920 dental implants. A high risk of bias was noted in 6 studies and low to moderate in 7 studies. R-CAIS showed greater accuracy for the coronal, apical, and angular deviations compared with d-CAIS. (-0.17 [-0.24, 0.09], (P<.001); -0.21 [-0.36, -0.06] (P=.006), and -1.41 [-1.56, -1.26] (P<.001)) CONCLUSIONS: R-CAIS can provide improved positional accuracy compared with d-CAIS when considering coronal, apical, and angular deviations. However, evidence to compare the positional accuracy of r-CAIS with s-CAIS was insufficient. These results should be interpreted with caution because of the limited data and the bias noted in several studies.
机器人辅助计算机植入手术(r-CAIS)的发展具有优势,但 r-CAIS 的定位准确性与其他形式的引导植入手术相比如何尚不清楚。
本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是评估 r-CAIS 的定位准确性,并比较 r-CAIS 与 s-CAIS 和 d-CAIS 的定位准确性。
两名独立审查员通过 5 个数据库系统地搜索了截止到 2023 年 5 月之前发表的文章,并进行了手动搜索。纳入评估 r-CAIS 定位准确性的文章。临床研究采用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具评估,体外研究采用 QUIN 工具评估。进行荟萃分析比较 r-CAIS 与 d-CAIS 的定位准确性。
共纳入 13 项研究,其中 9 项为体外研究,4 项为临床研究,共涉及 920 颗牙种植体。6 项研究存在高偏倚风险,7 项研究存在低到中度偏倚风险。r-CAIS 在冠向、根尖和角度偏差方面的准确性优于 d-CAIS。(-0.17[-0.24, 0.09], P<.001);-0.21[-0.36, -0.06](P=.006)和-1.41[-1.56, -1.26](P<.001)。
在考虑冠向、根尖和角度偏差时,r-CAIS 与 d-CAIS 相比,可提供更好的定位准确性。然而,比较 r-CAIS 与 s-CAIS 定位准确性的证据不足。由于数据有限,且多项研究存在偏倚,因此应谨慎解释这些结果。