ObjectivesTo compare miniscrew versus bone tracing registration methods on dental implant placement accuracy and time efficiency in edentulous jaws using a dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery (d-CAIS) system. MethodsTwelve fully edentulous maxillary models were allocated into two groups: miniscrew tracing (MST) group, where registration was performed by tracing four miniscrews; and bone tracing (BT) group, where registration was conducted by tracing maxillary bone fiducial landmarks. Six implants were placed on each model using the X-Guide® d-CAIS system. Pre- and postoperative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were superimposed to evaluate implant placement accuracy. The time required for registration and the overall surgery time were also recorded. ResultsThirty-six implants were placed in each group. The MST group showed significantly lower mean angulation deviations (mean difference (MD): -3.33°; 95 % confidence interval (CI): -6.56 to -0.09); p = 0.044), 3D platform deviations (MD: -1.01 mm; 95 % CI: -1.74 to -0.29; p = 0.006), 2D platform deviations (MD: -0.97 mm; 95 % CI: -1.71 to -0.23; p = 0.010), and 3D apex deviations (MD: -1.18 mm; 95 % CI: -1.92 to -0.44; p = 0.002) versus the BT group. The overall surgery time was similar for both groups (MD: 6.10 min.; 95 % CI: -0.31 to 12.51; p = 0.06), though bone tracing required significantly more time compared with miniscrew registration (MD: 4.79 min.; 95 % CI: 2.96 to 6.62; p < 0.05). ConclusionsRegistration with MST increases the accuracy of implant placement with a d-CAIS system in edentulous jaws compared with the BT method, and slightly reduces the overall surgery time. Clinical significanceMiniscrew tracing registration improves implant placement accuracy in comparison with bone tracing registration.