Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorMarques-Guasch, Jordi
dc.contributor.authorBofarull-Ballús, Anna
dc.contributor.authorGiralt-Hernando, Maria
dc.contributor.authorHernández-Alfaro, Federico
dc.contributor.authorGargallo-Albiol, Jordi
dc.date.accessioned2023-12-14T16:11:14Z
dc.date.available2023-12-14T16:11:14Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.citationMarques-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/dj11060150ca
dc.identifier.issn2304-6767ca
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12328/3872
dc.description.abstract(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.en
dc.format.extent20ca
dc.language.isoengca
dc.publisherMDPIca
dc.relation.ispartofDentistry Journalca
dc.relation.ispartofseries11;6
dc.rights© 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/).en
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject.otherSistemes de navegació quirúrgicaca
dc.subject.otherCirurgia dinàmicaca
dc.subject.otherCirurgia assistida per ordinadorca
dc.subject.otherCirurgia assistida per ordinadorca
dc.subject.otherImplant dentalca
dc.subject.otherPrecisióca
dc.subject.otherMetaanàlisica
dc.subject.otherSistemas de navegación quirúrgicaca
dc.subject.otherCirugía dinámicaes
dc.subject.otherCirugía asistida por ordenadores
dc.subject.otherCirugía asistida por computadoraes
dc.subject.otherImplante dentales
dc.subject.otherExactitudes
dc.subject.otherMetanálisiscaes
dc.subject.otherSurgical navigation systemsen
dc.subject.otherDynamic surgeryen
dc.subject.otherComputer-aided surgeryen
dc.subject.otherComputer-assisted surgeryen
dc.subject.otherDental implanten
dc.subject.otherAccuracyen
dc.subject.otherMeta-analysisen
dc.titleDynamic implant surgery— an accurate alternative to stereolithographic guides— systematic review and meta-analysisen
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleca
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionca
dc.rights.accessLevelinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.embargo.termscapca
dc.subject.udc616.3ca
dc.identifier.doihttps://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj11060150ca


Ficheros en el ítem

 

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

© 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/
Compartir en TwitterCompartir en LinkedinCompartir en FacebookCompartir en TelegramCompartir en WhatsappImprimir