Trial reportClinical oral investigations2025
Assessment of 3D-printed customized placement guides for a temporary anchorage device in the mandibular external oblique line area: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo create and construct a customized placement guide for a temporary anchorage device (TAD) in the mandibular external oblique line area, and assess the precision and safety of TAD placement using this guide. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis randomized clinical trial included 20 patients (mean age: 22.4 ± 4.1 years; male/female ratio: 8/12; all presenting with mild-to-moderate skeletal Class III malocclusion) who underwent TAD implantation in the mandibular buccal shelf. A total of 40 TADs were placed: 20 using the customized placement guide (guided [G] group) and 20 manually (non-guided [NG] group). In terms of accuracy, deviation between the actual and designed virtual placement position of the guided TAD placement was measured. The proximity of the TAD to the tooth root and inferior alveolar nerve canal was also evaluated to compare placement safety between the G and NG groups. Accuracy and safety assessments were conducted using 3Shape Implant Studio and Materialise Mimics. Preoperative and postoperative CBCT scans were aligned using landmark-based registration (mandibular canal, tooth roots) and surface matching algorithms. Angular deviations (between the TAD axis and the planned trajectory) and positional errors at the crown and tip were quantified with a precision of ± 0.1 mm and ± 0.5°, respectively. Statistical analysis included independent t-tests and ANOVA (α = 0.05).
resultsThe angular deviation between the actual and planned placement of TADs in the G group was 1.49°±0.67°; the difference at the crown of the TADs was 0.23 ± 0.15 mm; and the difference at the tip of the TADs was 0.52 ± 0.39 mm. The distance between the TAD and mandibular nerve canal in the G group was 6.8 ± 1.34 mm compared to 4.08 ± 0.96 mm in the NG group (P < 0.05). The distance between the TAD and the tooth root in the G group was 5.04 ± 2.24 mm compared to 1.53 ± 1.53 mm in the NG group. No contact with a tooth root was found in the G group, indicating higher safety in the G group than in the NG group.
conclusionsThe customized TAD placement guide for the mandibular external oblique line region demonstrated superior accuracy and safety for TAD placement. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This TAD placement guide offers benefits for clinical orthodontic practice, supporting its wider application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41251833What 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.