ArticleBDJ open2021
Failure rates associated with guided versus non-guided dental implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BDJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of Serum Vitamin D Levels on Survival Rate and Marginal Bone Loss in Dental Implants: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Thermal evaluation of pilot- and partially guided implant surgery - an in vitro study using automated robotic drilling.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Aetiology of early implant failure: a scoping review.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Fully Guided Implant Placement and Immediate Loading for the Restoration of the Edentulous Maxilla with a Fixed Dental Prosthesis: Report of Two Clinical Cases.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Influence of dental implant surfaces on oral biofilms and host immune response.Journal of oral microbiology · 2026Article
- Smartphone application-based augmented reality for pre-clinical dental implant placement training: a pilot study.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2025Article
- A New Full Digital Workflow for Fixed Prosthetic Rehabilitation of Full-Arch Edentulism Using the All-on-4 Concept.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Article
- Long-Term Effect of Guided Implant Surgery on Clinical Outcomes and Peri-Implantitis of Maxillary Implants-An Observational Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- "All-on-4" and "All-on-6" treatment concept applied using computer-guided surgery in a patient: Case report with a 2-year follow-up.Clinical case reports · 2023Article
- Article
- BDJ Open 2021 - our most successful year to date.British dental journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of the systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate implant failure rates and their association with guided and free-hand implant placement techniques. MATERIALS AND
methodsA literature search was conducted across PubMed, Medline via Ovid, Cochrane database, and Google Scholar. The search was completed in September 2020. Series of meta-analyses were conducted to compare implant failure rates with guided and free-hand techniques.
resultsA total of 3387 articles were identified from the electronic search. After applying the inclusion criteria, eight articles were selected for qualitative assessment and four for quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). The included studies had a risk ratio of 0.29 (95% CI: 0.15, 0.58), P < 0.001 for the use of guided implant placement. Implant failure rates were affected by the different placement techniques indicated by the test for overall effect (Z = 3.53, P = 0.0004). The incidence of implant failure in guided surgery versus free-hand surgery was found to be 2.25% and 6.42%, respectively.
conclusionBoth guided and free-hand implant placement techniques resulted in a high implant survival rate. However, implant failure rates were almost three times higher in the free-hand implant placement category. A guided implant placement approach is recommended for a successful outcome.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.