Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39363652›Full record

ArticleClinical implant dentistry and related research2025

Ultrasonography-Guided Dental Implant Surgery: A Feasibility Study.

Paolo Nava, Hamoun Sabri, Javier Calatrava, Jacob Zimmer, Zhaozhao Chen, Junying Li, Hom-Lay Wang

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Paolo NavaDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-6177-3000
Hamoun SabriDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6581-2104
Javier CalatravaDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1080-6285
Jacob ZimmerDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Zhaozhao ChenDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2188-1367
Junying LiDepartment of Biologic and Materials Sciences, Division of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5782-2051
Hom-Lay WangDepartment of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4238-1799

Funding

University of Michigan Graduate Periodontics Student Research Fund
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the feasibility of ultrasound-image-based computer-assisted implant planning and placement. MATERIALS AND

methodsIntraoral scans, cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT), and ultrasound (US) scans with a custom positioning device were acquired in nine patients. Prosthetic-driven surgical guides were planned and fabricated based on ultrasound images and intraoral scans. Implants were then placed. Postoperative implant position was obtained intra-surgically by intraoral scan. Aside from the ultrasound-based plan, conventional implant planning was performed by the same operator on a pre-surgical CBCT for comparison. Linear deviations between ultrasound and CBCT-planned implant positions were measured and compared with the intra-surgical implant position, and the position deviations between two consecutive plannings were performed on the same CBCT by the same operator. The linear deviation between the 3D scan surface of the edentulous region and the ultrasonographic soft tissue profile segmentation was also assessed with reverse-engineering software. Means, standard deviations, and root mean square differences (RMSD) were calculated for every variable.

resultsAll the ultrasound-planned implants were successfully placed, and no complications were recorded. The mean deviations in angles, shoulders, and apexes were 5.27 ± 1.75° (RMSD: 5.53°), 0.92 ± 0.26 mm (RMSD: 0.95 mm), and 1.41 ± 0.61 mm (RMSD: 1.53 mm), respectively, between the US and CBCT-planned implants; 2.63 ± 0.43° (RMSD: 2.66°), 1.16 ± 0.30 mm (RMSD: 1.19 mm), and 1.26 ± 0.27 mm (RMSD: 1.28 mm) between the planned implant and intra-surgically recorded positions; and 2.90 ± 1.36° (RMSD: 3.18°), 0.65 ± 0.27 mm (RMSD: 0.70 mm), and 0.99 ± 0.37 mm (RMSD: 1.05 mm) between two consecutive CBCTs planning performed by the same operator. The mean deviation between the 3D surfaces of model scans and ultrasound-derived soft tissue profile in the edentulous area was 0.19 ± 0.08 mm.

conclusionsUltrasound-guided implant surgery represents a feasible non-ionizing alternative to conventional static guided implant surgical protocols for implant placement in sites with favorable characteristics.

Indexed as

Dental Implantation, EndosseousDental ImplantsSurgery, Computer-AssistedUltrasonography, InterventionalAdultAgedCone-Beam Computed TomographyFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalMaleMiddle AgedPatient Care PlanningUltrasonographyDental ImplantsaccuracyCBCTguided surgeryintraoral scannerultrasonography

Identifiers

PMID39363652
PMCPMC11739851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.