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

Abstract

AbstractAimTo compare the implant accuracy, safety and morbidity between robot‐assisted and freehand dental implant placement.Materials and MethodsSubjects requiring single‐site dental implant placement were recruited. Patients were randomly allocated to freehand implant placement and robot‐assisted implant placement. Differences in positional accuracy of the implant, surgical morbidity and complications were assessed. The significance of intergroup differences was tested with an intention‐to‐treat analysis and a per‐protocol (PP) analysis (excluding one patient due to calibration error).ResultsTwenty patients (with a median age of 37, 13 female) were included. One subject assigned to the robotic arm was excluded from the PP analysis because of a large calibration error due to the dislodgement of the index. For robot‐assisted and freehand implant placement, with the PP analysis, the median (25th–75th percentile) platform global deviation, apex global deviation and angular deviation were 1.23 (0.9–1.4) mm/1.9 (1.2–2.3) mm (p = .03, the Mann–Whitney U‐test), 1.40 (1.1–1.6) mm/2.1 (1.7–3.9) mm (p < .01) and 3.0 (0.9–6.0)°/6.7 (2.2–13.9)° (p = .08), respectively. Both methods showed limited damage to the alveolar ridge and had similar peri‐ and post‐operative morbidity and safety.ConclusionsRobot‐assisted implant placement enabled greater positional accuracy of the implant compared to freehand placement in this pilot trial. The robotic system should be further developed to simplify surgical procedures and improve accuracy and be validated in properly sized trials assessing the full spectrum of relevant outcomes.