ArticlePloS one2021
A new inertial navigation system for guiding implant placement. An in-vitro proof-of-concept study.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy of the surgical template used in the placement of implants and orthodontic miniscrews.BMC oral health · 2025Pooled it
- Development of a Real-Time 6-DOF Motion-Tracking System for Robotic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the potential use of a new advanced inertial navigation system for guiding dental implant placement and to compare this approach with standard stereolithographic template guiding. A movement processing unit with a 9-axis absolute orientation sensor was adapted to a surgical handpiece and wired to a computer navigation interface. Sixty implants were placed by 10 operators in 20 jaw models. The 30 implants of the test group were placed in 10 models guided by the new inertial navigation prototype. The 30 implants of the control group were placed in another 10 models using a CAD-CAM template. Both groups were subdivided into experienced and non-experienced operators. Pre- and postoperative computer tomography images were obtained and matched to compare the planned and final implant positions. Four deviation parameters (global, angular, depth, and lateral deviation) were defined and calculated. The primary outcome was the angular deviation between the standard stereolithographic approach and the new inertial navigation system. Results showed no significant differences between both groups, suggesting that surgical navigation based on inertial measurement units (IMUs) could potentially be useful for guiding dental implant placement. However, more studies are still needed to translate this new approach into clinical practice.
Indexed as
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.