AI-assisted versus conventional workflow for guided dental implant placement
Assessment of the Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence Assisted Workflow Versus Conventional Workflow in Computer Guided Implant Placement: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.
PHASE4 · Cairo University · NCT07523815
This study will test whether an AI-assisted planning and 3D-printed guide design gives more accurate dental implant placement than a conventional computer-guided workflow for adults missing a posterior lower tooth.
Quick facts
| Phase | PHASE4 |
|---|---|
| Study type | Interventional |
| Enrollment | 20 (estimated) |
| Ages | 18 Years to 50 Years |
| Sex | All |
| Sponsor | Cairo University (other) |
| Locations | 1 site (Cairo, Manial) |
| Trial ID | NCT07523815 on ClinicalTrials.gov |
What this trial studies
This randomized trial enrolls adults with a Kennedy class III partially edentulous mandible and compares an AI-assisted CAD/CAM planning and guide-design workflow to a conventional virtual planning workflow performed by an experienced clinician. All participants receive CBCT imaging and full-arch impressions, and surgical guides with embedded sleeves are designed and 3D-printed for each case. Implant placement is performed by a single experienced surgeon using identical perioperative protocols, and postoperative implant positions are compared to planned positions to measure placement precision. Secondary measures include guide fit, surgical complications, and any need for corrective interventions.
Who should consider this trial
Good fit: Adults aged 18–60 with a Kennedy class III posterior mandibular single-tooth gap suitable for delayed single-implant placement and with healthy adjacent teeth.
Not a fit: Patients with D4 bone density, active infection, heavy smoking, systemic conditions impairing healing, need for anterior implants or bone grafting, additional local surgery, or who are pregnant or breastfeeding are unlikely to benefit or be eligible.
Why it matters
Potential benefit: If successful, this approach could improve implant placement accuracy, reduce surgical errors, and lower the need for corrective procedures.
How similar studies have performed: Computer-guided implant placement is well established, while AI-assisted planning is an emerging approach with encouraging preliminary reports but limited randomized trial evidence.
Eligibility criteria
Show full inclusion / exclusion criteria
Inclusion Criteria: * Kennedy class III partially edentulous patient with or without modifications. * Patients who need single implant posterior site delayed implant placement. * Patients above 18 and below 60 years of age. * Natural healthy neighboring teeth without need of new restorations. Exclusion Criteria: * Patients with D4 bone density. * Patients with known systemic or local diseases or treatments which can affect normal tissue healing. * Patients who are heavy smokers. * Presence of signs of active infection or pus formation. * Patients with a need for implants in the anterior region. * Additional oral surgery in the region of interest. * Need For Bone grafting. * Pregnant and/or lactating women
Where this trial is running
Cairo, Manial
- Faculty of Dentistry - Cairo University — Cairo, Manial, Egypt (RECRUITING)
Study contacts
- Study coordinator: Sandra Moussa El Tarzi, BDS
- Email: sandra.eltarzi@dentistry.cu.edu.eg
- Phone: +201226665141
How to participate
- Review the eligibility criteria above with your treating physician.
- Visit the official trial page on ClinicalTrials.gov for the most current contact information and recruitment status.
- Contact the listed study coordinator or principal investigator to request pre-screening. Pre-screening is free and never obligates you to enroll.
Conditions: Partially Edentulous Mandible, Dental Implant, Implant Placement, Accuracy, Computer guided, CAIS, Implant planning, CAD/CAM