SynthesisMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2026
Comparison of dental implant placement accuracy between robotic and static or dynamic computer-assisted surgeries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robotic Computer-Assisted Dental Implant Surgery Versus Free-Hand and Guided Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Pooled it
- Accuracy, Efficiency, and Patient- and Surgeon-Reported Outcomes of Static Versus Robotic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Clinical oral implants research · 2026Trial
- Clinical Accuracy and Patient Experience Following Robotic-Assisted Full-Arch Implant Rehabilitation: A Case Series.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes of robotic-assisted versus static computer-assisted implant surgery: a retrospective comparative study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic computer-assisted implant surgery (rCAIS) has been developed to enhance implant placement accuracy compared to static (sCAIS) and dynamic (dCAIS) computer-assisted implant surgeries. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and compare the accuracy of rCAIS to other CAIS approaches. MATERIAL AND
methodsElectronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and CNKI up to September 2024. Additionally, a manual search of relevant journals and reference lists was performed. Clinical and preclinical studies comparing rCAIS with sCAIS or dCAIS were included. Primary outcomes were global platform deviation, global apex deviation, and angular deviation between planned and actual implant positions. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias using RoB 2 for randomized trials, the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies, the SYRCLE tool for animal studies, and the QUIN tool for in vitro studies.
resultsEleven studies met the inclusion criteria. In clinical studies, rCAIS (157 implants) demonstrated significantly lower deviations compared to sCAIS (166 implants): Global platform MD=-0.73mm (95% CI: -1.00 to -0.45; p<0.00001), apex deviation MD=-0.84mm (95% CI: -1.12 to -0.56; p<0.00001), and angular deviation MD=-1.51° (95% CI: -2.71 to -0.32; p=0.01). In preclinical studies, rCAIS also outperformed dCAIS (both 270 implants): Platform deviation MD=-0.15mm (95% CI: -0.24 to -0.07; p=0.0002), apex deviation MD=-0.19mm (95% CI: -0.27 to -0.10; p<0.0001), and angular deviation MD=-1.03° (95% CI: -1.70 to -0.37; p=0.002).
conclusionsrCAIS demonstrates superior accuracy compared to sCAIS or dCAIS. However, the magnitude of observed differences is small, and thus the improvements may not be clinically relevant despite the statistical significance. Further well-designed and large-scale studies are warranted to explore the influencing factors and optimize the clinical application of rCAIS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.