The accuracy of implant insertion is the key for success in implant dentistry. Prosthetically-driven concept became highly acknowledged nowadays. Static computer assisted implant surgery served this purpose using surgical guides. However, these guides limited visualization, surgical site accessibility and irrigation benefits. Dynamic computer assisted implant surgery also evolved to improve implant insertion accuracy. It depended on real-time intraoperative feedback during surgical procedures. However, it lacked physical constraints to eliminate positioning errors, requires maintaining a clear camera site-line during operation and mandates the operator to monitor the screen and the surgical area simultaneously. Recently, robotic-assisted implant surgery (R-AIS) was introduced. According to the autonomy level, robotics can be passive, semi-active or active. In passive robotic systems, the operator guides the robotic arm to the surgical field and prepares the implant bed. The robotic arm physically constrains the drill movement to match the preplanned position, while another operator monitors the procedure. Semi-active robotic systems enhanced the autonomy level allowing the robot to prepare the implant bed. The operators’ role involved moving the robotic arm, changing drills and operation monitoring. Active robotic systems decrease the operator role to operation monitoring and replacing dills, whereas the robotic arm independently moves to the implant site and prepares the implant bed. R-AIS allowed real-time intraoperative navigation, enhanced visualization, accuracy while minimizing human errors. However, their high cost, need for training, limited cognitive ability possessed a challenge. R-AIS represents a promising approach, however, more advancements are required to overcome their limitations.

The study aimed to address the evolution of guided implant surgeries, their benefits and limitations. It also aimed to clarify different robotic systems ad their role in implant guided dentistry.