Dynamic implant surgery— an accurate alternative to stereolithographic guides— systematic review and meta-analysis
Autor/a
Marques-Guasch, Jordi
Bofarull-Ballús, Anna
Giralt-Hernando, Maria
Hernández-Alfaro, Federico
Gargallo-Albiol, Jordi
Fecha de publicación
2023ISSN
2304-6767
Resumen
(1) Background: Dynamic guided surgery is a computer-guided freehand technology that allows highly accurate procedures to be carried out in real time through motion-tracking instruments. The aim of this research was to compare the accuracy between dynamic guided surgery (DGS) and alternative implant guidance methods, namely, static guided surgery (SGS) and freehand (FH). (2) Methods: Searches were conducted in the Cochrane and Medline databases to identify randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective and retrospective case series and to answer the following focused question: “What implant guidance tool is more accurate and secure with regard to implant placement surgery?” The implant deviation coefficient was calculated for four different parameters: coronal and apical horizontal, angular, and vertical deviations. Statistical significance was set at a p-value of 0.05 following application of the eligibility criteria. (3) Results: Twenty-five publications were included in this systematic review. The results show a non-significant weighted mean difference (WMD) between the DGS and the SGS in all of the assessed parameters: coronal (n = 4 WMD = 0.02 mm; p = 0.903), angular (n = 4 WMD = −0.62°; p = 0.085), and apical (n = 3 WMD = 0.08 mm; p = 0.401). In terms of vertical deviation, not enough data were available for a meta-analysis. However, no significant differences were found among the techniques (p = 0.820). The WMD between DGS and FH demonstrated significant differences favoring DGS in three parameters as follows: coronal (n = 3 WMD = −0.66 mm; p =< 0.001), angular (n = 3 WMD = −3.52°; p < 0.001), and apical (n = 2 WMD = −0.73 mm; p =< 0.001). No WMD was observed regarding the vertical deviation analysis, but significant differences were seen among the different techniques (p = 0.038). (4) Conclusions: DGS is a valid alternative treatment achieving similar accuracy to SGS. DGS is also more accurate, secure, and precise than the FH method when transferring the presurgical virtual implant plan to the patient.
Tipo de documento
Artículo
Versión del documento
Versión publicada
Lengua
English
Materias (CDU)
616.3 - Patología del aparato digestivo. Odontología
Palabras clave
Sistemes de navegació quirúrgica
Cirurgia dinàmica
Cirurgia assistida per ordinador
Cirurgia assistida per ordinador
Implant dental
Precisió
Metaanàlisi
Sistemas de navegación quirúrgica
Cirugía dinámica
Cirugía asistida por ordenador
Cirugía asistida por computadora
Implante dental
Exactitud
Metanálisis
Surgical navigation systems
Dynamic surgery
Computer-aided surgery
Computer-assisted surgery
Dental implant
Accuracy
Meta-analysis
Páginas
20
Publicado por
MDPI
Colección
11; 6
Publicado en
Dentistry Journal
Citación
Marques-Guasch, Jordi; Bofarull-Ballús, Anna; Giralt-Hernando, Maria [et al.]. Dynamic implant surgery— an accurate alternative to stereolithographic guides— systematic review and meta-analysis. Dentistry Journal, 2023, 11(6), 150. Disponible en: <https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6767/11/6/150>. Fecha de acceso: 14 dic. 2023. DOI: 10.3390/dj11060150
Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)
- Odontologia [245]
Derechos
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/