Statement of problem: 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.
Purpose: 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.
Material and methods: 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.
Results: 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.
Copyright © 2024 Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.