SynthesisClinical and experimental dental research2026
Robotic Computer-Assisted Dental Implant Surgery Versus Free-Hand and Guided Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic computer-assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) aims to improve implant placement trueness, but existing reviews include heterogeneous designs, and no review has exclusively synthesized RCTs to date. This review aimed to evaluate the positional trueness and clinical outcomes of r-CAIS compared with free-hand implant surgery (FHIS), dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (d-CAIS), and static computer-assisted implant surgery (s-CAIS), through a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Electronic searches were performed in major biomedical databases from inception to March 2026. Only RCTs were eligible. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool and certainty of evidence was rated using the GRADE framework. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model where feasible.
resultsSeven RCTs enrolling 529 implants were included. Moderate-certainty evidence demonstrated significantly improved positional trueness with r-CAIS over FHIS across all deviation parameters, with the largest effect observed for angular deviation (MD = -4.56°; 95% CI -6.25 to -2.86). High certainty evidence showed a significant angular deviation advantage of r-CAIS over d-CAIS (MD = -0.77°; 95% CI: -1.33 to -0.21), while platform and apical deviations did not differ significantly. All comparisons with s-CAIS were non-significant, rated low to very low certainty from a single small trial. Operative time evidence was very low certainty, precluding any directional conclusion. Early implant retention ranged from 93.3% to 100% across all modalities with no meaningful between-group differences.
conclusionsr-CAIS improves implant positional trueness compared with free-hand surgery, supported by moderate certainty evidence, with a high certainty angular deviation advantage over dynamic navigation. However, improved trueness has not been shown to translate into better clinical or patient-reported outcomes. Wider clinical use should depend on long-term, multicenter RCTs using standardized patient-centered outcomes.
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.