Does Registration Affect Robotic Implant Accuracy: CBCT Vs Intraoral Scanning

To compare the accuracy of CBCT and intraoral scanning (IOS) registration in robot-guided implant placement by analyzing deviations at implant platform, apex, and angular alignment. In this randomized controlled trial, 27 patients were allocated to two groups: CBCT registration (n=13, 18 implants) or IOS registration (n=14, 19 implants). Robot-guided surgery was performed identically in both groups. Postoperative CBCT scans were superimposed on preoperative plans to measure total, vertical, and lateral deviations at the platform and apex, as well as angular errors. Data were analyzed using ANOVA (α=0.05). Platform total deviations (IOS: 0.84±0.36 mm vs CBCT: 0.85±0.74 mm), apex total deviations (IOS: 1.04±0.45 mm vs CBCT: 0.94±0.96 mm), and angular deviations (IOS: 1.85±1.69° vs CBCT: 2.66±2.65°) showed no statistically significant differences (p>0.05). Both CBCT and IOS registration methods demonstrated comparable accuracy in robot-guided implant placement (p>0.05). IOS registration further eliminates the need for additional preoperative CBCT scans, reducing patient radiation exposure and streamlining clinical workflows. These benefits support IOS registration as a viable alternative to CBCT registration for robot-assisted implant procedures.