Accuracy of AI Assisted Surgical Guide (AISG) (AISG)

July 13, 2026 updated by: Alshaimaa saeed, Suez Canal University

Accuracy of AI-Assisted Static Surgical Guides in Delayed Dental Implant Placement in The Maxillary Esthetic Zone: A Randomized Controlled Trial

The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the accuracy of conventional static surgical guide and AI-assisted static surgical guide in implant placement in the esthetic zone of partially edentulous maxilla , This study will be carried out on patients seeking implant placement in partially edentulous esthetic zone of maxilla, selected from those who were referred to outpatient clinic of the department of oral and maxillofacial surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Suez Canal University. The main research question is assessing what the difference is upon using AI-assisted surgical guide in terms of the accuracy of implant angular and linear deviation, and implant depth. The expected outcome is that The use of AI-assisted surgical guide in implant placement may provide higher accuracy and less deviation than the conventional static surgical guide. This clinical study will be conducted on 20 surgical guides for placement of 20 implants, divided into 2 groups: Group 1: 10 conventional computer-guided static guides for placement of 10 implants (as control group) Group 2: 10 AI-assisted static surgical guides for placement of 10 implants (as study group) The selected patients will get a pre operative CBCT scan and an intraoral scan then the guide design and generation will be performed using conventional software or AI integrated software according to randomization chart generated by "www.randomizer.org", and after the surgery of implant placement through the prefabricated guides the patients will get an immediate post operative CBCT scan.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Wide research has been conducted to enhance the accuracy of implant placement within the bone while adopting more conservative techniques to improve overall success rates. The digital workflow for computer-aided implant surgery includes a range of steps leading to generation of a prosthetically driven, 3-dimensional virtual plan, and generation of static surgical guide. The use of AI integrated software decreases those steps drastically and seems to be a time saver. This study aims to evaluate and compare the accuracy of conventional static surgical guide and AI-assisted static surgical guide in implant placement in the esthetic zone of partially edentulous maxilla. This clinical study will be conducted on 20 surgical guides, divided equally and randomly via (www.randomizer.org) into 2 groups: Group 1: 10 implants will be placed using 10 conventional surgical guides which are made using traditional manual planning & designing (control group). Group 2: 10 implants will be placed using 10 AI-assisted surgical guides crafted with the help of machine learning-based planning software (study group). AI integrated software performs thorough analysis of the patient's anatomy & a personalized and precise approach of implant placement. By automating the planning process, AI-assisted guides help reduce human error, planning time and provide precise, data-driven recommendations for implant placement position.

Objectives of this study is

Radiographic assessment through:

  • pre-operative CBCT & immediate postoperative CBCT to measure and compare angular and linear deviation, and implant depth between planned and actual implant positions in both groups.
  • 6 months post operative CBCT for measuring marginal bone level

    • peri implant bone density.

Clinical assessment through:

• Measuring implant stability quotient (ISQ) by Osstell ISQ Scale immediately and 6 months post operative.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

20

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

      • Ismailia, Egypt
        • Faculty of dentistry, Suez Canal University

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 1- Missing teeth in esthetic zone of maxilla. 2-Both genders (male and female). 3- Adult ages (from 21 years to 60 years).

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Medically compromised patient (uncontrolled diabetes, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and hemophilia). 2- Patient with oral habit as bruxism, heavy smoking. 3- Patient with bad oral hygiene. 4- Patient with severe gingival diseases. 5- Patient with severe periodontal diseases (with severe vertical or horizontal bone loss).

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: conventional static surgical guide
Conventional digitally planned surgical guide used for guided implant placement.
Active Comparator: AI assisted static surgical guide
AI assisted surgical guide for guided placement of dental implants

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Higher accuracy of AI assisted surgical guide
Time Frame: Within 24 hours after implant placement

The deviation between the planned and the actual implant positions will be measured in three dimensions:

1) 2) Angular deviation calculated in degrees. Linear deviation at implant platform and implant apex in millimeters. 3) Implant depth in millimeters The less the deviation, the higher the accuracy

Within 24 hours after implant placement

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Successful Osseointegration
Time Frame: 6 months postoperative follow up
Implant stability will be measured using an Osstell device (Implant Stability Quotient - ISQ). 6 months Post-operative CBCT for measuring marginal bone level & peri implant bone density.
6 months postoperative follow up

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

July 14, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

May 14, 2027

Study Completion (Estimated)

July 14, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 13, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 13, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

July 17, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

July 17, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 13, 2026

Last Verified

July 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

IPD Plan Description

There is no plan to share individual participant data due to institutional policies and participant confidentiality.

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Accuracy of AI App

Clinical Trials on Implant placement using Conventional static surgical guide

3
Subscribe