Abstract:Background/Objective: With the rapid advancement in surgical technologies, new workflows for mandibular reconstruction are constantly being evaluated. Cutting guides are extensively employed for defining osteotomy planes but are prone to errors during fabrication and positioning. A virtually defined osteotomy plane and drilling holes in robotic surgery minimize potential sources of error and yield highly accurate outcomes. Methods: Ten mandibular replicas were evaluated after cutting-guided saw osteotomy and robot-guided laser osteotomy following reconstruction with patient-specific implants. The descriptive data analysis summarizes the mean, standard deviation (SD), median, minimum, maximum, and root mean square (RMS) values of the surface comparison for 3D printed models regarding trueness and precision. Results: The saw group had a median trueness RMS value of 2.0 mm (SD ± 1.7) and a precision of 1.6 mm (SD ± 1.4). The laser group had a median trueness RMS value of 1.2 mm (SD ± 1.1) and an equal precision of 1.6 mm (SD ± 1.4). These results indicate that robot-guided laser osteotomies have a comparable accuracy to cutting-guided saw osteotomies, even though there was a lack of statistical significance. Conclusions: Despite the limited sample size, this digital high-tech procedure has been shown to be potentially equivalent to the conventional osteotomy method. Robotic surgery and laser osteotomy offers enormous advantages, as they enable the seamless integration of precise virtual preoperative planning and exact execution in the human body, eliminating the need for surgical guides in the future.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is how the robotic - guided laser osteotomy performs in terms of dimensional accuracy compared with the traditional saw osteotomy in mandibular reconstruction surgery. Specifically, the study aims to evaluate the dimensional accuracy of robotic - guided laser osteotomy after reconstruction with patient - specific implants to determine whether this new technology can achieve an accuracy level comparable to or even better than that of the traditional method. By comparing the trueness and precision of the two techniques, the study hopes to provide a scientific basis for the feasibility and advantages of laser osteotomy in clinical applications. ### Research Background - **Proposing the Problem**: Traditional osteotomy tools such as hammers, chisels, rotary and vibrating instruments are widely used in daily surgeries, but they have some disadvantages. For example, the vibration and heat generated during the cutting process may lead to bone fragments, blockage of the bone surface, necrosis and impaired bone healing. In addition, traditional tools also have limitations in cutting geometries, and not every cutting shape can be achieved. - **Advantages of the New Technology**: Robotic - guided laser osteotomy can overcome these limitations, reduce human errors and improve cutting accuracy and stability. In particular, the Er:YAG laser has a low - temperature cutting characteristic, which has less impact on the bone, helps to maintain the trabecular bone structure and pores, reduces mechanical and thermal damage and promotes bone healing. ### Research Objectives - **Evaluating the Accuracy**: Evaluate the feasibility and advantages of the new technology by comparing the dimensional accuracy of robotic - guided laser osteotomy and traditional saw osteotomy in mandibular reconstruction. - **Verifying the Hypothesis**: Hypothesize that robotic - guided laser osteotomy is not inferior to traditional saw osteotomy in terms of dimensional accuracy and may even be superior. ### Methods - **Experimental Design**: The study used 10 mandibular replicas and performed saw osteotomy and robotic - guided laser osteotomy respectively, and reconstructed them with patient - specific implants. - **Data Collection**: Obtain digital models of the replicas through 3D printing and scanning technologies, and use 3D analysis software to evaluate the differences between the cut models and the reference models. - **Statistical Analysis**: Use descriptive statistical methods (mean, standard deviation, median, minimum, maximum and root - mean - square) and non - parametric tests (Wilcoxon rank - sum test) to evaluate the trueness and precision. ### Results - **Trueness**: The median root - mean - square (RMS) value of trueness in the laser group was 1.2 mm (standard deviation ± 1.1 mm), and the median RMS value of trueness in the saw group was 2.0 mm (standard deviation ± 1.7 mm). Although the trueness in the laser group was slightly better than that in the saw group, the difference was not statistically significant. - **Precision**: The median RMS values of precision in both groups were 1.6 mm (standard deviation ± 1.4 mm), and the difference was not statistically significant. ### Conclusions - **Main Conclusions**: Although the sample size was limited, the study showed that robotic - guided laser osteotomy was comparable to traditional saw osteotomy in terms of dimensional accuracy and had potential equivalence. The advantages of robotic surgery and laser osteotomy lie in the ability to seamlessly integrate accurate virtual preoperative planning and actual operations, and are expected to eliminate the need for surgical guides in the future. - **Future Prospects**: The development and application of this technology are expected to further improve surgical accuracy, reduce surgical time, reduce the risk of complications and improve clinical outcomes. Through this study, the author hopes to provide a scientific basis for the application of laser osteotomy in mandibular reconstruction and promote the further development of related technologies.

Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of Robot-Guided Laser Osteotomy in Reconstruction with Patient-Specific Implants—An Accuracy Study of Digital High-Tech Procedures

Accuracy of dental implant surgery with robotic position feedback and registration algorithm: An <i>in</i>-<i>vitro</i> study

Accuracy of a New Robotically Assisted Technique for Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Cadaveric Study

Simultaneous Evaluation of Bone Cut and Implant Placement Accuracy in Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty

Comparison of Implant Precision with Robots, Navigation, or Static Guides

Accuracy of implant site preparation in robotic navigated dental implant surgery

Accuracy of Edentulous Computer-Aided Implant Surgery as Compared to Virtual Planning: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

Accuracy of implant placement with computer-aided static, dynamic, and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials

Development and Validation of Collaborative Robot-assisted Cutting Method for Iliac Crest Flap Raising: Randomized Crossover Trial

Prospects of Robot-Assisted Mandibular Reconstruction with Fibula Flap: Comparison with a Computer-Assisted Navigation System and Freehand Technique

Accuracy of mandibular repositioning surgery using new technology: Computer-aided design and manufacturing customized surgical cutting guides and fixation plates

Digital Surgical Guides in Mandibular Genioplasty: Evaluating Precision Against Conventional Techniques

Error Analysis of Robot-Assisted Orthognathic Surgery

The Feasibility of Robot-Assisted Chin Osteotomy on Skull Models: Comparison with Surgical Guides Technique

Accuracy of an autonomous dental implant robotic system versus static guide-assisted implant surgery: A retrospective clinical study

Digital Versus Radiographic Accuracy Evaluation of Guided Implant Surgery: an in Vitro Study

Accuracy assessment of robot-assisted implant surgery in dentistry: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Accuracy of Dental Implant Placement using Robotics. A Systematic Review of in vitro Studies

An in vitro analysis of the accuracy of static and robot‐assisted implant surgery

Accuracy of Implant Placement using a Mixed Reality-Based Dynamic Navigation System versus Static Computer-Assisted and Freehand Surgery: an in Vitro Study

Improved positional accuracy of dental implant placement using a haptic and machine‐vision‐controlled collaborative surgery robot: A pilot randomized controlled trial