Comparative Accuracy of Intraoral Scanning and <scp>CBCT</scp> Registration in Robotic Computer‐Assisted Implant Surgery for Partially Edentulous Patients: A Randomised Controlled Trial

ABSTRACT Aim To compare the impact of intraoral scanning (IOS) and cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) registration on implant positional accuracy in robotic computer‐assisted implant surgery (r‐CAIS). Materials and Methods Patients requiring implant placement in the anterior or premolar regions were enrolled and randomly allocated to either a CBCT group or an IOS group at a 1:1 ratio. Implant positional accuracy was assessed by comparing planned versus actual implant positions using global platform deviation, global apex deviation and angular deviation. Subgroup analyses were performed based on jaw position and span length. The implant survival rate and patient satisfaction were recorded at prosthesis delivery. Statistical analysis was performed using linear mixed‐effects modelling. Results Thirty‐two patients were included (16 patients with 25 implants in each group). In the IOS group, the global platform deviation, global apex deviation and angular deviation were reported as mean ± standard deviation (SD): 0.89 (0.65) mm, 0.95 (0.77) mm and 1.91 (1.98)°, respectively. In the CBCT group, the corresponding values were 0.88 (0.42) mm, 0.98 (0.46) mm and 1.84 (1.46)°. No statistically significant differences were found between IOS and CBCT groups ( p &gt; 0.05) regardless of jaw position or edentulous span. The implant survival rate and patient satisfaction were 100% in both groups. Conclusions Preoperative registration using IOS is non‐inferior to CBCT‐based registration in implant accuracy for r‐CAIS, supporting its application as a radiation‐free alternative for registration in partially edentulous patients with sufficient number of stable residual teeth. Trial Registration ChiCTR2400093045

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal Of Clinical Periodontology
Published
2026-03-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.70120
Primary Topic
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Accuracy of Intraoral Scanning and CBCT Registration in Robotic Computer‐Assisted Implant Surgery for Partially Edentulous Patients: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Qi Yan, Bo Shi, Yulan Wang, Jiaxian Chen et al.
Journal Of Clinical Periodontology
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
article

Comparative Accuracy of Intraoral Scanning and CBCT Registration in Robotic Computer‐Assisted Implant Surgery for Partially Edentulous Patients: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Qi Yan, Bo Shi, Yulan Wang, Jiaxian Chen, Yufeng Zhang, Yaoyu Zhao
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Aim To compare the impact of intraoral scanning (IOS) and cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) registration on implant positional accuracy in robotic computer‐assisted implant surgery (r‐CAIS). Materials and Methods Patients requiring implant placement in the anterior or premolar regions were enrolled and randomly allocated to either a CBCT group or an IOS group at a 1:1 ratio. Implant positional accuracy was assessed by comparing planned versus actual implant positions using global platform deviation, global apex deviation and angular deviation. Subgroup analyses were performed based on jaw position and span length. The implant survival rate and patient satisfaction were recorded at prosthesis delivery. Statistical analysis was performed using linear mixed‐effects modelling. Results Thirty‐two patients were included (16 patients with 25 implants in each group). In the IOS group, the global platform deviation, global apex deviation and angular deviation were reported as mean ± standard deviation (SD): 0.89 (0.65) mm, 0.95 (0.77) mm and 1.91 (1.98)°, respectively. In the CBCT group, the corresponding values were 0.88 (0.42) mm, 0.98 (0.46) mm and 1.84 (1.46)°. No statistically significant differences were found between IOS and CBCT groups ( p &gt; 0.05) regardless of jaw position or edentulous span. The implant survival rate and patient satisfaction were 100% in both groups. Conclusions Preoperative registration using IOS is non‐inferior to CBCT‐based registration in implant accuracy for r‐CAIS, supporting its application as a radiation‐free alternative for registration in partially edentulous patients with sufficient number of stable residual teeth. Trial Registration ChiCTR2400093045

Journal Of Clinical Periodontology
Wuhan University (CN), Stomatology Hospital (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.