Comparative Analysis of Implant Placement Accuracy Using Augmented Reality Technology Versus 3D-Printed Surgical...

Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the precision of dental implant placements using augmented reality (AR)-iPhone (Apple, Cupertino, CA, USA) navigation technology versus conventional 3D-printed surgical guides. The accuracy was assessed by comparing the actual implant positions to their predefined three-dimensional (3D) locations in surgical plans using the Exocad software (Exocad, Dormstadt, Germany). Materials and Methods: Fourteen standardized mandibular models were divided into two groups: AR-guided (AR1-AR7) and 3D-printed surgical guide-assisted (Group 1-7). Each model received four implants in positions 35, 32, 42, and 45. Postoperative CBCT scans were aligned with the preoperative plans in the Exocad software to measure three-dimensional deviations, including total entry error, total apex error, and angular error. Statistical analysis was performed using the Statistica 12 software (StatSoft, Tulsa, OK, USA), incorporating Shapiro-Wilk normality tests, ANOVA, and post hoc LSD tests (where applicable). Results: The in vitro comparative experiment demonstrated AR group superior accuracy with mean deviations of 0.42 ± 0.12 mm at the entry point and 0.51 ± 0.18 mm at the apex, compared to 0.48 ± 0.15 mm and 0.58 ± 0.22 mm, respectively, in the 3D-printed guide group (p < 0.05). Angular deviation was significantly lower in the AR group (1.8° ± 0.6°) versus the guide group (2.1° ± 0.7°, p = 0.009). Descriptive statistics revealed the median apex error was 0.49 mm (IQR: 0.38-0.61) for AR versus 0.56 mm (IQR: 0.45-0.72) for guides. Conclusions: AR iPhone navigation technology achieved clinically acceptable accuracy compared to static 3D-printed guides, particularly in controlling angular deviations. While both methods produced clinically acceptable results, AR technology represents a significant advancement for precision-sensitive cases.