Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41422584›Full record

ReviewInternational dental journal2026

Contemporary Applications of Robotic Systems in Dental Implantology: A Review.

Nozimjon Tuygunov, Nikos Mattheos, James Tsoi, Munira Ruzikulova, Thanaphum Osathanon, Lakshman Samaranayake

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International dental journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Nozimjon TuygunovFaculty of Dentistry, Kimyo International University in Tashkent, Tashkent, Uzbekistan. Electronic address: nozimtuygunov@gmail.com.
Nikos MattheosDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand; Department of Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. Electronic address: nikos@mattheos.net.
James TsoiFaculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; Center of Excellence in Precision Medicine and Digital Health, Department of Physiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.
Munira RuzikulovaDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Tashkent State Medical University, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.
Thanaphum OsathanonDepartment of Anatomy, Faculty of Dentistry, Center of Excellence for Dental Stem Cell Biology, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand; Centre of Artificial Intelligence and Innovation, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Lakshman SamaranayakeFaculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; Center of Excellence in Periodontal Disease and Dental Implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand; Global Research Cell, Dr. D. Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pimpri, Pune 411018, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The integration of robotics into dental implantology represents a transformative shift towards enhanced surgical precision, consistency, and reproducibility. This review critically examines the development and clinical application of current dental implant robotic systems through th`e lens of robotic autonomy levels, as classified by contemporary frameworks. Emphasis is placed on systems operating at autonomy levels 0-1, (collaborative), and level 2, (task-autonomous), highlighting their procedural capabilities, limitations, and regulatory considerations. Although robotic systems demonstrate superior accuracy compared to either dynamic of static guided implant placement, several challenges persist, including high costs, complexity, clinical validation, scalability and constraints in performing biologically complex procedures. Previously cited barriers, such as restricted access to the posterior oral regions, are being increasingly addressed through flexible hardware and improved intraoral registration protocols. To support continued advancement, this review proposes strategic initiatives aimed at transitioning toward conditional autonomy (Level 3). These include simplification of surgical workflows, enhanced procedural flexibility, integration of AI-driven intraoperative adaptation, and modular system design. By focusing on robotic autonomy rather than general system overviews, this article offers a forward-looking perspective on how the next generation of dental surgical robots may achieve greater independence while maintaining safety, precision and clinical control.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantationDental Implantation, EndosseousRoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresDental ImplantsHumansSurgery, Computer-AssistedDental ImplantsArtificial intelligenceComputer-assisted surgeryDental implantologyHuman-robot collaborationImplant robotsRobotic surgerySurgical accuracy

Identifiers

PMID41422584
PMCPMC12794488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.