ArticleBMC oral health2025
Influence of guide support on the accuracy of static Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery (sCAIS) in partially edentulous cases using a keyless guiding system: an in vitro study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of accuracy of four types of fully guided dental implant surgical guides: an in vivo study.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Accuracy of dental implant positioning by dynamic or static computer-assisted implant surgery: a randomized controlled clinical trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Cumulative Error in Digital Workflows for Full-Arch Implant Rehabilitation: A Narrative Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the influence of guide support on the accuracy of sCAIS using a keyless guiding system in different cases of partial edentulism.
methodsSixty polyamide models of partially edentulous maxillae, simulating anterior and posterior single-tooth gaps as well as anterior and distal extended edentulous areas, were fabricated. Full-arch, 2-teeth, and 4-teeth supported surgical guides were used to place implants at FDI 15, 17, 21, 26 sites in Model A and at FDI 12, 22, 15 sites in Model B. In total, 210 replica implants were placed using 120 surgical guides in seven implantation sites. Three-dimensional crestal and apical, angular and vertical deviations from the planned implant positions were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis H test with Dunn's procedure for multiple pairwise comparisons.
resultsOverall median 3D crestal and apical deviations of implants placed with 2-teeth guide support (0.62 mm [0.45-0.84], 0.92 mm [0.69-1.25]) and 4-teeth guide support (0.65 mm [0.52-0.81], 1.01 mm [0.8-1.26]) were significalty lower compared to the full-arch support group (0.86 mm [0.63-0.98], 1.26 mm [0.98-1.52]) with values of p < 0.017. Overall angular and vertical deviations of implants placed with 2-teeth guide support (2.61° [1.71-3.75], 0.32 mm [0.15-0.44]) were significantly lower compare to the full-arch support group (3.22° [2.25-4.41], 0.46 mm [0.24-0.62]). In the subgroup analysis, implants placed at the FDI 12, 22, and 15 positions exhibited significantly higher 3D and angular deviations with full-arch guide support, whereas the 3D apical and angular deviations of were significantly lower with 2-teeth guide support at the FDI 21 site.
conclusionsThe deviations in all guide support groups did not exceed the recommended safety margins. Statistically significant differences were found between guide support groups, with influence of guide support on the accuracy of sCAIS varying across different implantation sites.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.