6 Oral & maxillofacial / craniofacial studies in the library address this question.
“Between modalities, no significant differences were found; HD and RMSE were 2.95 ± 0.94 mm and 1.28 ± 0.49 mm.”
Tsuchiya 2025 · Comparative study · n: 11 orbital fractures
“Virtual reality/AR technology offers significant potential in various aspects, including student education, resident evaluation, surgical planning, and overall surgical implementation.”
Stucki 2024 · Narrative review
“The main results indicated that the use of MR technology in OGS led to high accuracy and time reduction as primary outcomes and cost-effectiveness and skill improvement as secondary outcomes.”
Stevanie 2024 · Systematic review
“The average differences in the positioning of the condylar and fossa prosthesis are 1.252 ± 0.269 mm and 1.393 ± 0.335 mm, respectively.”
Niloy 2024 · Case series · n: 2 patients
Study designs: 1 comparative or prospective study, 2 reviews and 3 case reports, case series and technical reports.
Tsuchiya M et al. · Applied Sciences · 2025
Oral & maxillofacial / craniofacial · Comparative study · n: 11 orbital fractures
“Between modalities, no significant differences were found; HD and RMSE were 2.95 ± 0.94 mm and 1.28 ± 0.49 mm.”
Stucki J et al. · Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2024
Oral & maxillofacial / craniofacial · Narrative review
“Virtual reality/AR technology offers significant potential in various aspects, including student education, resident evaluation, surgical planning, and overall surgical implementation.”
Stevanie C et al. · Maxillofacial plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2024
Oral & maxillofacial / craniofacial · Systematic review
“The main results indicated that the use of MR technology in OGS led to high accuracy and time reduction as primary outcomes and cost-effectiveness and skill improvement as secondary outcomes.”
Niloy I et al. · Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2024
Oral & maxillofacial / craniofacial · Case series · n: 2 patients
“The average differences in the positioning of the condylar and fossa prosthesis are 1.252 ± 0.269 mm and 1.393 ± 0.335 mm, respectively.”
1.252 ± 0.269 mm
Ulbrich M et al. · JMIR serious games · 2023
Oral & maxillofacial / craniofacial · Crossover study · n: 6 novices; 13 fibulae + 13 os coxae each (312 models)
Cho KH et al. · Annals of surgery · 2021
Oral & maxillofacial / craniofacial · Case report · n: 1 patient
“Holographic models required less time and cost for fabrication.”
All oral & maxillofacial / craniofacial studiesThis question across specialtiesBrowse the whole library
Summarises published research on VR/AR surgical planning across all platforms. Not product labelling. For Elucis indications see /elucis.
Intended for healthcare professionals.
Summaries and quotes describe each study's methods and the findings its authors report. They are not claims by Realize Medical and may contain errors: please read the original paper. Inclusion is not an endorsement of any product or use.