ArticleThe Saudi dental journal2024
Computer guided versus freehand dental implant surgery: Randomized controlled clinical trial.
Article in The Saudi dental journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Digital Dentistry in Clinical Practice: A Scoping Review of Current Capabilities and Future Directions.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Digital Technologies in Implantology: A Narrative Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study compares, in terms of rehabilitation and recovery, freehand implant placement using flapless or mini-flap procedures with the use of 3D implant design software and specialized surgical templates among patients who are partially or completely edentulous. A secondary aim is to propose an algorithm for predicting the accuracy of implant placement. Method.Patients with an alveolar height of at least 7 mm and an alveolar width of at least 4 mm were randomly assigned to two groups. Group I comprised ten patients who received computer-guided dental implant placement, while Group II comprised ten patients who received manual placements. A temporary prosthodontic was immediately inserted onto the implants, which was replaced by a permanent one after 4-6 months. Results: The study enrolled twenty patients. A blinded, independent assessor evaluated the outcome variables, which included implant failure, marginal bone loss, treatment duration, post-surgical pain and swelling, use of painkillers, surgical time, and patient satisfaction. Pain scores in Group II were significantly higher than those in Group I, but there were no other significant differences. All patients experienced pain after 2 days, but by 7 days, only two patients in Group I and four patients in Group II were still suffering, although this difference was not statistically significant. After 14 days, all patients were asymptomatic. Conclusion: Although the freehand technique is straightforward for experienced surgeons, surgical guides enhance the accuracy of implant placement, particularly in a deficient alveolar ridge.
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.