Meta-analysis of the effect of static computer-assisted dental implantation on the accuracy of dental implantation in esthetic area.

IF 0.9
Zhongping Yin, Huifang Kuang, Li Li, Xi Si
{"title":"Meta-analysis of the effect of static computer-assisted dental implantation on the accuracy of dental implantation in esthetic area.","authors":"Zhongping Yin, Huifang Kuang, Li Li, Xi Si","doi":"10.4314/ahs.v25i2.40","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This system evaluates the effect of static navigation systems on accuracy (platform, apical and angular deviation) in clinical studies of implant surgery in the anterior aesthetic zone to inform clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>Retrieve Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library databases, as well as randomized controlled trials (RCT) and controlled clinical trials (CCT) comparing dynamic navigation and static guidance published by the US Clinical Trial Registry before May 1, 2023. The outcome indicators included in the study include measuring the deviation between the preoperative design of the implant and the actual site at the top, apex, and angle. The calculation of meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.2 software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1134 articles were screened and retrieved, and finally 4 studies were included for quantitative analysis. Meta analysis results showed that the two groups had lower depth angle deviation (WMD=-0.30, 95%CI: (0.24, 1.78), P=0.01) at the top (WMD=0.14, 95% CI: (-0.26, 0.55), P=0.49) and root tip (WMD=0.25, 95%CI: (-0.34, 0.84), P=0.41) compared to the static guide plate group, and the difference was statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The static guide plate provides a small implant placement error, which is comparable to the error obtained using dynamic navigation systems, but dynamic navigation exhibits a smaller angle deviation.</p>","PeriodicalId":94295,"journal":{"name":"African health sciences","volume":"25 2","pages":"343-353"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12361951/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African health sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v25i2.40","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This system evaluates the effect of static navigation systems on accuracy (platform, apical and angular deviation) in clinical studies of implant surgery in the anterior aesthetic zone to inform clinical decision-making.

Methodology: Retrieve Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library databases, as well as randomized controlled trials (RCT) and controlled clinical trials (CCT) comparing dynamic navigation and static guidance published by the US Clinical Trial Registry before May 1, 2023. The outcome indicators included in the study include measuring the deviation between the preoperative design of the implant and the actual site at the top, apex, and angle. The calculation of meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.2 software.

Results: 1134 articles were screened and retrieved, and finally 4 studies were included for quantitative analysis. Meta analysis results showed that the two groups had lower depth angle deviation (WMD=-0.30, 95%CI: (0.24, 1.78), P=0.01) at the top (WMD=0.14, 95% CI: (-0.26, 0.55), P=0.49) and root tip (WMD=0.25, 95%CI: (-0.34, 0.84), P=0.41) compared to the static guide plate group, and the difference was statistically significant.

Conclusion: The static guide plate provides a small implant placement error, which is comparable to the error obtained using dynamic navigation systems, but dynamic navigation exhibits a smaller angle deviation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

静态计算机辅助种植对美观区种植准确性影响的meta分析。
背景:本系统评估静态导航系统在前美学区种植手术临床研究中对精度(平台、根尖和角度偏差)的影响,为临床决策提供依据。方法:检索Pubmed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆数据库,以及2023年5月1日前美国临床试验注册中心发布的动态导航和静态指南的随机对照试验(RCT)和对照临床试验(CCT)。本研究纳入的结局指标包括测量种植体的术前设计与实际位置在顶部、尖端和角度之间的偏差。meta分析计算采用Review Manager 5.2版软件。结果:共筛选检索文献1134篇,最终纳入4篇研究进行定量分析。Meta分析结果显示,两组根尖(WMD=0.14, 95%CI: (-0.26, 0.55), P=0.49)和根尖(WMD=0.25, 95%CI: (-0.34, 0.84), P=0.41)的深度角偏差(WMD=-0.30, 95%CI: (0.24, 1.78), P=0.01)均低于静态导板组,差异有统计学意义。结论:静态导向板提供的种植体放置误差较小,与动态导航系统的误差相当,但动态导航的角度偏差较小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信