Abstract:Statement of problem: Robotic systems have shown promise for implant placement because of their accuracy in identifying surgical positions. However, research on the accuracy of patient calibration methods based on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and intraoral scanner (IOS) data registration is lacking. Purpose: The purpose of this in vitro study was to develop a calibration method based on the registration of CBCT and IOS data of a robot-assisted system for implant placement, evaluate the accuracy of this calibration method, and explore the accuracy of robot-assisted surgery at different implant positions. Material and methods: Twenty standardized, polyurethane, partially edentulous maxillary typodonts were divided into 2 groups: one group used a calibration method based solely on CBCT data (CBCT group), and the other used a calibration method based on the registration of CBCT and IOS data (IOS group). Four implants were planned for each typodont in the right second premolar, left central incisor, left first premolar, and left second molar positions. The robot performed the osteotomies and implant placement step by step according to the preoperative plan. The operating software program automatically measured the deviation between the planned and actual implant position. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the least significant difference (LSD) post hoc test (α=.05) were used to analyze differences between the test groups. Results: The angular deviation and 3-dimensional deviations at implant platform and apex between the 2 calibration methods did not significantly differ among the 4 implant positions (P>.05). The horizontal and depth deviations at the implant platform and apex levels between the 2 calibration methods did not significantly differ among the 4 implant positions (P>.05). In the anterior region (left central incisor), the CBCT group showed higher horizontal deviation at both the implant platform and apex compared with the IOS group (P<.05). Conversely, the IOS group had greater depth deviation at both the implant platform and apex than the CBCT group (P<.05). In the posterior region, with or without distal extension (right second premolar, left first premolar, and left second molar), no statistically significant differences were found between the 2 calibration methods (P>.05). Conclusions: The calibration method that was based on the registration of CBCT and IOS data demonstrated high accuracy. No significant differences in the accuracy of the calibration methods for robot-assisted implant placement were found between the CBCT group and IOS group.

The influence of radiographic marker registration versus a markerless trace registration method on the implant placement accuracy achieved by dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery. An in-vitro study

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

Accuracy and patient-centered results of marker-based and marker-free registrations for dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: A randomized controlled trial

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

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

Accuracy of markerless registration methods of DICOM and STL files used for computerized surgical guides in mandibles with metal restorations: An in vitro study

Accuracy of a dynamic navigation system for dental implantation with two different workflows and intraoral markers compared to static-guided implant surgery: An in-vitro study

The impacts of registration‐and‐fixation device positioning on the performance of implant placement assisted by dynamic computer‐aided surgery: A randomized controlled trial

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

Influence of implant reference on the scanning accuracy of complete arch implant scans captured by using a photogrammetry system

Effects of minute misregistrations of prefabricated markers for image-guided dental implant surgery: an analytical evaluation

Accuracy of a calibration method based on cone beam computed tomography and intraoral scanner data registration for robot-assisted implant placement: An in vitro study

The Accuracy of Dental Implant Placement With Different Methods of Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Network Meta-Analysis of Clinical Studies

A Comparative Prospective Study on the Accuracy and Efficiency of Autonomous Robotic System Versus Dynamic Navigation System in Dental Implant Placement

Validation of a novel AI-based automated multimodal image registration of CBCT and intraoral scan aiding presurgical implant planning

Accuracy of Different Registration Areas Using Active and Passive Dynamic Navigation Systems in Dental Implant Surgery: an in Vitro Study.

Comparison of the positional accuracy of robotic guided dental implant placement with static guided and dynamic navigation systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital implant impression techniques in bilateral distal extension cases: a randomized clinical trial

Accuracy and patient-centered results of static and dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery in edentulous jaws: a retrospective cohort study

Accuracy of robotic-assisted surgery for immediate implant placement in posterior teeth: a retrospective case series

Digital registration versus cone-beam computed tomography for evaluating implant position: a prospective cohort study