SynthesisJournal of Indian Prosthodontic Society2025
Comparison of accuracy in freehand versus computer-assisted (dynamic and static) dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of the accuracy/precision among guided (static), manual, and dynamic navigation in dental implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic Guidance and Optical Navigation for Precision Implant Placement: a Prospective Comparative Clinical Study.Maedica · 2026Article
- Article
- Synergistic role of oral and maxillofacial surgery and prosthodontics in implant-based rehabilitation: a scoping review protocol.BDJ open · 2026Review
- The accuracy of dental implant placement with different computer-assisted implant surgery techniques.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Dynamic navigation versus conventional 3D-printed guides in implant surgery: A randomised controlled trial.Bioinformation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWhen compared to conventional freehand procedures, the development of computer-assisted techniques in dental implant insertion surgery has significantly changed traditional practices, bringing about a movement toward improved precision and predictability. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of traditional freehand methods versus static-dynamic computer-assisted dental implant placement procedures in terms of accuracy and precision. METHODOLOGY: This study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, screening 438 articles from databases such as PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. The inclusion criteria were randomized and nonrandomized control trials, case controls and retrospective case studies, focusing on platform deviation, angular deviation, and apical deviation in dynamic, static, and freehand surgeries. Eleven studies were selected for a review, with nine studies included in the meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was analyzed using appropriate statistical models to ensure robust findings and reliability of the results.
resultsThe meta-analysis included nine studies comparing dental implant accuracy across dynamic, static, and freehand placement techniques. Dynamic systems showed superior accuracy, with platform deviations of 0.64-1.73 mm, angular deviations of 2.49°-5.75°, and apical deviations of 0.89-1.86 mm. Static systems showed slightly greater variability, with platform deviations of 0.97-2.34 mm and angular deviations of 2.2°-4.98°. Freehand techniques demonstrated the highest deviations, with platform deviations up to 3.48 mm and angular deviations up to 10.09°. Prediction intervals indicated consistent superiority of dynamic guidance across metrics.
conclusionWhen compared to static and freehand methods, dynamic computer-assisted dental implant surgery provides more accuracy and precision. In implant dentistry, adopting dynamic guided systems is essential to attaining the best clinical results and raising patient satisfaction.
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.