ArticleJournal of applied oral science : revista FOB2026
Implant placement accuracy using computer-guided surgical templates supported by bone and mucosa: an in vitro study.
Article in Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis in vitro study evaluated the accuracy of virtual planning for single implant placement in the regions of teeth 33 and 43, comparing bone-supported and mucosa-supported guides. A secondary analysis assessed differences related to insertion method, since implant placement in the 43 region used a manual ratchet and in the 33 region used a motorized handpiece. METHODOLOGY: In total, 32 implants were placed in 16 edentulous artificial mandibles (8 using bone-supported guides and 8 using mucosa-supported guides), with two implants per mandible. Implant positions were assessed using computed tomography and compared with the virtual plan using ImageJ (2.16.0/1.54p) and OneViewerApp (version 1.18.0.0, 2023). Statistical analysis was performed on Jamovi (p<0.05). Linear deviations between the planned and actual implant placement were compared using t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test, depending on data distribution.
resultsResults indicated greater deviations for mucosa-supported guides, especially in the buccolingual direction, whereas bone-supported guides exhibited greater accuracy.
conclusionWithin the limitations of this in vitro study, the type of guide support may influence implant placement accuracy and should be carefully considered, particularly in procedures requiring high precision. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings in clinical settings.
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.