Literature DB >> 30328203

Static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS) analysing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), economics and surgical complications: A systematic review.

Tim Joda1,2, Wiebe Derksen3, Julia Gabriela Wittneben4, Sebastian Kuehl5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the scientific literature for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS).
METHODS: A PICO strategy was executed using an electronic (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL), plus manual search up to 15-06-2017 focusing on clinical studies investigating s-CAIS with regard to patients' pain & discomfort, economics and/or intra-operative complications. Search strategy was assembled from multiple conjunctions of MeSH Terms and unspecific free-text words. Assessment of risk of bias in selected studies was made at a "trial level" applying the Cochrane Collaboration Tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Assessment Scale, respectively.
RESULTS: The systematic search identified 112 titles. Seventy abstracts were screened, and 14 full texts were included for analysis. A total of 484 patients were treated with s-CAIS for placement of 2,510 implants. Due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, meta-analyses could not be performed.
CONCLUSIONS: The number of identified studies investigating s-CAIS for PROMs was low. Scientifically proven recommendations for clinical routine cannot be given at this time; however, the number of clinical complications with s-CAIS seems to be negligible and comparable to conventional implant surgery. s-CAIS may offer a beneficial treatment option in edentulous cases if a flapless approach is applicable. Nevertheless, the economic effects in terms of time efficiency and treatment costs are unclear. Clinical investigations with well-designed RCTs investigating PROMs with standardized parameters are compellingly necessary for the field of s-CAIS.
© 2018 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  guided surgery; patient-reported outcome measures; static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS); systematic review; virtual implant planning

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30328203     DOI: 10.1111/clr.13136

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res        ISSN: 0905-7161            Impact factor:   5.977


  10 in total

Review 1.  Accuracy assessment of dynamic computer-aided implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Adrià Jorba-García; Albert González-Barnadas; Octavi Camps-Font; Rui Figueiredo; Eduard Valmaseda-Castellón
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Questions about the numerical value and quantitative data transfer of tooth preparation-from experience guidance to digital guidance.

Authors:  Hai-Yang Yu
Journal:  Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2021-02-01

3.  Accuracy of half-guided implant placement with machine-driven or manual insertion: a prospective, randomized clinical study.

Authors:  Kristof Orban; Endre Varga; Peter Windisch; Gabor Braunitzer; Balint Molnar
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-08-16       Impact factor: 3.606

Review 4.  Time and costs related to computer-assisted versus non-computer-assisted implant planning and surgery. A systematic review.

Authors:  Tobias Graf; Christine Keul; Daniel Wismeijer; Jan Frederik Güth
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2021-10       Impact factor: 5.021

5.  Combining Intraoral and Face Scans for the Design and Fabrication of Computer-Assisted Design/Computer-Assisted Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) Polyether-Ether-Ketone (PEEK) Implant-Supported Bars for Maxillary Overdentures.

Authors:  Francesco Mangano; Carlo Mangano; Bidzina Margiani; Oleg Admakin
Journal:  Scanning       Date:  2019-08-22       Impact factor: 1.932

6.  Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for Two Implant Placement Techniques in Sinus Region (Bone Graft versus Computer-Aided Implant Surgery): A Randomized Prospective Trial.

Authors:  Ghazwan Almahrous; Sandra David-Tchouda; Aboubacar Sissoko; Nathalie Rancon; Jean-Luc Bosson; Thomas Fortin
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-04-25       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Accuracy of guided surgery using the silicon impression and digital impression method for the mandibular free end: a comparative study.

Authors:  Koudai Nagata; Kei Fuchigami; Noriyuki Hoshi; Mihoko Atsumi; Katsuhiko Kimoto; Hiromasa Kawana
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-01-12

8.  Multivariate analysis of causal factors influencing accuracy of guided implant surgery for partial edentulism: a retrospective clinical study.

Authors:  Atsushi Matsumura; Tamaki Nakano; Shinji Ono; Akihiro Kaminaka; Hirofumi Yatani; Daijiro Kabata
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-04-19

9.  Case report: Fabrication of a dental implant guide based on tetrahedron positioning technology.

Authors:  Jie Lin; Zhenxiang Lin; Zhiqiang Zheng
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2021-07-07       Impact factor: 2.757

10.  Full in-Office Guided Surgery with Open Selective Tooth-Supported Templates: A Prospective Clinical Study on 20 Patients.

Authors:  Francesco Guido Mangano; Uli Hauschild; Oleg Admakin
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 3.390

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.