ArticleMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2026
Drill irrigation during in vitro drilling with three static computer-assisted implant surgery systems.
Article in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStatic computer-assisted implant surgery (sCAIS) allows for accurate implant placement. However, the currently available systems usually block drill irrigation, increasing the risk of overheating and tissue damage. The present in vitro study evaluates the volume of irrigation solution that passes through the guide sleeve during implant drilling with different sCAIS systems. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe volume of irrigation solution that passed through a designed guide sleeve was measured on a 5ml syringe. The following sCAIS systems and groups were evaluated: A sleeve-in-sleeve with drill handle system (Straumann® sCAIS system); an integrated sleeve-in-drill system (RealGuide™ Z3D sCAIS system), and an integrated sleeve-in-drill system with irrigation channels (Adin® sCAIS system). The control group had neither drill handle nor sleeve-in-drill. The first pilot drill from each system was used, and drilling was performed for 10 seconds. The experiment was repeated 10 times for each group, and a blinded investigator measured the amount of irrigation solution in ml/s. A descriptive and bivariate analysis was performed.
resultsThe median volume of irrigant collected over 10 seconds was: Sleeve-in-sleeve group, 0.35 (IQR: 0.04) ml/s; sleeve-in-drill group, 0.07 (IQR: 0.04) ml/s; sleeve-in-drill system with channels group, 0.46 (IQR: 0.12) ml/s; and control group, 0.54 (IQR: 0.02) ml/s. The differences between groups were statistically significant (p=0.0001), except for the Adin sCAIS® system, which was not different from the control group (p=0.085).
conclusionsWithin the limitations of the study, the volume of irrigation seems to be influenced by the design and sCAIS system used. Although all guides impeded irrigation, the Adin® sCAIS system facilitated irrigation the most.
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.