Comparing Guided Surgical Endodontics Using Static Guidance, Dynamic Navigation, and Augmented Reality: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 2.2 Q1 Dentistry
Paak Rewthamrongsris, Uraiwan Chokechanachaisakul, Zohaib Khurshid, Thanaphum Osathanon
{"title":"Comparing Guided Surgical Endodontics Using Static Guidance, Dynamic Navigation, and Augmented Reality: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Paak Rewthamrongsris, Uraiwan Chokechanachaisakul, Zohaib Khurshid, Thanaphum Osathanon","doi":"10.1055/s-0046-1824743","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Endodontic microsurgery is a treatment for persistent periapical pathology, where precision in root-end surgery is crucial for success. Advances in digital technology have introduced guided endodontic microsurgery, incorporating static guidance (SG), dynamic navigation (DN), and augmented reality (AR) to enhance surgical accuracy and efficiency. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and compare the accuracy of SG, DN, and AR in endodontic microsurgery.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This review followed PRISMA guidelines. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (CRD42024583867). A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar was conducted from inception to February 2026. Studies comparing SG, DN, and AR in endodontic microsurgery were included. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I V2, the JBI Checklist, and the QUIN tool. Meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were performed on studies with comparable accuracy parameters. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's <i>Q</i>-test and <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-three studies met the predefined inclusion criteria: 1 nonrandomized clinical trial, 1 case series, and 31 in vitro and cadaver studies. Due to limited clinical studies, the clinical trial and case series identified were synthesized qualitatively, while the meta-analysis pooled only in vitro and cadaveric studies. A meta-analysis demonstrated that SG and DN significantly reduced 3D global deviation at the bur tip compared with FH (<i>p</i> < 0.01). While the drilled root length error did not differ between SG and DN, DN exhibited significantly greater resection angle deviation than SG (<i>p</i> < 0.01). AR showed potential benefits in accuracy, but the data were insufficient for meta-analysis. SG required the least operating time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SG and DN enhance accuracy and efficiency in endodontic microsurgery compared with freehand techniques in in vitro and cadaveric studies. Standardized outcome measures and further clinical trials with long-term follow-up are needed to validate these findings.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Further clinical studies with long-term follow-up are warranted to confirm the effects of guided surgical endodontics on clinical outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":12028,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0046-1824743","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Endodontic microsurgery is a treatment for persistent periapical pathology, where precision in root-end surgery is crucial for success. Advances in digital technology have introduced guided endodontic microsurgery, incorporating static guidance (SG), dynamic navigation (DN), and augmented reality (AR) to enhance surgical accuracy and efficiency. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate and compare the accuracy of SG, DN, and AR in endodontic microsurgery.

Materials and methods: This review followed PRISMA guidelines. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (CRD42024583867). A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar was conducted from inception to February 2026. Studies comparing SG, DN, and AR in endodontic microsurgery were included. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I V2, the JBI Checklist, and the QUIN tool. Meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were performed on studies with comparable accuracy parameters. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q-test and I 2 statistics.

Results: Thirty-three studies met the predefined inclusion criteria: 1 nonrandomized clinical trial, 1 case series, and 31 in vitro and cadaver studies. Due to limited clinical studies, the clinical trial and case series identified were synthesized qualitatively, while the meta-analysis pooled only in vitro and cadaveric studies. A meta-analysis demonstrated that SG and DN significantly reduced 3D global deviation at the bur tip compared with FH (p < 0.01). While the drilled root length error did not differ between SG and DN, DN exhibited significantly greater resection angle deviation than SG (p < 0.01). AR showed potential benefits in accuracy, but the data were insufficient for meta-analysis. SG required the least operating time.

Conclusion: SG and DN enhance accuracy and efficiency in endodontic microsurgery compared with freehand techniques in in vitro and cadaveric studies. Standardized outcome measures and further clinical trials with long-term follow-up are needed to validate these findings.

Clinical relevance: Further clinical studies with long-term follow-up are warranted to confirm the effects of guided surgical endodontics on clinical outcomes.

比较使用静态引导、动态导航和增强现实的牙髓外科手术:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:根管显微手术是治疗顽固性根尖周围病变的一种方法,根尖手术的精确性是成功的关键。数字技术的进步引入了引导牙髓显微手术,结合了静态引导(SG)、动态导航(DN)和增强现实(AR),以提高手术的准确性和效率。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估和比较根管显微手术中SG、DN和AR的准确性。材料和方法:本综述遵循PRISMA指南。该方案已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册数据库(CRD42024583867)中注册。我们对PubMed、Scopus和b谷歌Scholar进行了全面的检索,从创建到2026年2月。比较SG、DN和AR在牙髓显微手术中的应用。使用ROBINS-I V2、JBI检查表和QUIN工具评估偏倚风险。对准确度参数具有可比性的研究进行meta分析和亚组分析。异质性采用Cochran’s q检验和i2统计量进行评估。结果:33项研究符合预定的纳入标准:1项非随机临床试验,1例病例系列,31项体外和尸体研究。由于临床研究有限,确定的临床试验和病例系列是定性合成的,而荟萃分析仅汇集了体外和尸体研究。一项荟萃分析表明,与FH相比,SG和DN可显著降低牙尖三维整体偏差(p p)。结论:在体外和尸体研究中,与徒手技术相比,SG和DN可提高牙髓显微手术的准确性和效率。需要标准化的结果测量和进一步的长期随访临床试验来验证这些发现。临床相关性:需要进一步的临床研究和长期随访来证实引导牙髓手术对临床结果的影响。
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
European Journal of Dentistry
European Journal of Dentistry Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
161
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Dentistry is the official journal of the Dental Investigations Society, based in Turkey. It is a double-blinded peer-reviewed, Open Access, multi-disciplinary international journal addressing various aspects of dentistry. The journal''s board consists of eminent investigators in dentistry from across the globe and presents an ideal international composition. The journal encourages its authors to submit original investigations, reviews, and reports addressing various divisions of dentistry including oral pathology, prosthodontics, endodontics, orthodontics etc. It is available both online and in print.
×
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
小红书