<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>7(1)</volume><submitter>Xu Z</submitter><pubmed_abstract>Computer-aided implant surgery has undergone continuous development in recent years. In this study, active and passive systems of dynamic navigation were divided into active dynamic navigation system group and passive dynamic navigation system group (ADG and PDG), respectively. Active, passive and semi-active implant robots were divided into active robot group, passive robot group and semi-active robot group (ARG, PRG and SRG), respectively. Each group placed two implants (FDI tooth positions 31 and 36) in a model 12 times. The accuracy of 216 implants in 108 models were analysed. The coronal deviations of ADG, PDG, ARG, PRG and SRG were 0.85 ± 0.17 mm, 1.05 ± 0.42 mm, 0.29 ± 0.15 mm, 0.40 ± 0.16 mm and 0.33 ± 0.14 mm, respectively. The apical deviations of the five groups were 1.11 ± 0.23</pubmed_abstract><journal>NPJ digital medicine</journal><pagination>182</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC11227595</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Accuracy of dental implant placement using different dynamic navigation and robotic systems: an in vitro study.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC11227595</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Zhou L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Han B</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Guo J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chen J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Xiao Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Wu S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Wu D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Zhang S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Xu Z</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Accuracy of dental implant placement using different dynamic navigation and robotic systems: an in vitro study.</name><description>Computer-aided implant surgery has undergone continuous development in recent years. In this study, active and passive systems of dynamic navigation were divided into active dynamic navigation system group and passive dynamic navigation system group (ADG and PDG), respectively. Active, passive and semi-active implant robots were divided into active robot group, passive robot group and semi-active robot group (ARG, PRG and SRG), respectively. Each group placed two implants (FDI tooth positions 31 and 36) in a model 12 times. The accuracy of 216 implants in 108 models were analysed. The coronal deviations of ADG, PDG, ARG, PRG and SRG were 0.85 ± 0.17 mm, 1.05 ± 0.42 mm, 0.29 ± 0.15 mm, 0.40 ± 0.16 mm and 0.33 ± 0.14 mm, respectively. The apical deviations of the five groups were 1.11 ± 0.23</description><dates><release>2024-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2024 Jul</publication><modification>2025-04-22T15:37:43.59Z</modification><creation>2025-04-06T01:24:57.833Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC11227595</accession><cross_references><pubmed>38971937</pubmed><doi>10.1038/s41746-024-01178-6</doi></cross_references></HashMap>