ArticleThe journal of advanced prosthodontics2025
Influence of template design on the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgery.
Article in The journal of advanced prosthodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of static computer-assisted implant surgery (s-CAIS) by comparing the planned and actual positions of implants placed in a partially edentulous model using surgical templates with different sleeve designs. MATERIALS AND
methodsForty-nine mandibular partially edentulous models were scanned using a model scanner to create standard tessellation language (STL) files. The models were divided into seven groups based on sleeve design: Group 1-4 (Open non-metal sleeves with varying heights (3 mm, 6 mm) and buccal widths (5 mm, 6 mm)), Group 5-6 (Closed non-metal sleeves with heights of 3 mm and 6 mm), and Group 7 (Closed metal sleeve). After implant placement at #45 and #47, STL files were generated and analyzed using 3D measurement software. Deviations were measured in terms of horizontal deviation (coronal and apical), vertical deviation, and angular deviation. Statistical significance was evaluated using the Wilcoxon rank sum test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and multiple generalized linear models.
resultsWhile height differences showed no significant deviations (
conclusionClosed sleeves demonstrated greater accuracy in s-CAIS compared to open sleeves. Higher sleeves may improve implant placement accuracy, but buccal insertion width did not significantly affect accuracy.
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.