Trial reportClinical implant dentistry and related research2025
Patient-Reported Healing of Static Computer-Assisted Sinus Lateral Window Osteotomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report 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 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.
- Digital Dentistry in Clinical Practice: A Scoping Review of Current Capabilities and Future Directions.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Static-Computer Assisted Implant Surgery: Where Are We Now?Australian dental journal · 2025Review
- Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: Patients' Experience and Perspectives.Clinical and experimental dental research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe primary aim was to investigate differences in patient-reported healing outcomes between static computer-assisted sinus floor augmentation (SCA-SFA) and the conventional freehand approach (SFA). MATERIAL AND
methodsPatient-reported healing outcomes were recorded in visual analog scale (VAS) on days 1-7 and 14, and intra and postoperative complications were assessed on weeks 2 and 4 after surgery. Operation time and operators' assessment of efficacy for SCA-SFA utility were recorded. Independent t-tests and Chi-square exact tests were performed for statistical evaluation between groups.
resultsForty patients underwent lateral sinus augmentation (20 freehand-SFA + 20 SCA-SFA). No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups with regard to PROMs and intra, postoperative complications, apart from a higher level of swelling for SCA-SFA patients on day 2 after surgery (p = 0.04). The use of SCA-SFA significantly reduced the time needed to conduct the window osteotomy (SFA 18.56 ± 12.17 min vs. SCA-SFA 11.43 ± 4.75 min; p = 0.022) and the total surgery duration (SFA 69.89 ± 20.08 min vs. SCA-SFA 56.24 ± 16.01 min; p = 0.023).
conclusionsWithin the limitations of the study, SCA-SFA should be preferred when the reduction of surgical time is a priority while the costs of the intervention do not play a major role, and the design of the surgical guide should strive for minimal invasiveness. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: TCTR20230427005.
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.