Literature DB >> 31917014

Five-year survival rates for implants placed using digitally-designed static surgical guides: a systematic review.

K Walker-Finch1, C Ucer2.   

Abstract

Digitally-designed static surgical guides provide an acceptable level of accuracy and predictability for the placement of dental implants. However, to our knowledge, few published studies have compared the long-term survival of implants placed in this way with those placed using other methods. A systematic search of electronic databases using a population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) framework was conducted of Medline and EMBASE, as well as grey literature and hand searches, to obtain all relevant work pertaining to the survival of dental implants placed by guided surgery. The studies were required to have at least 10 patients with a follow up of at least five years. A total of 621 titles were screened. Four studies met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis, and they all reported the exclusive use of Nobel Biocare implants and the NobelGuide system (Nobel Biocare Services). Cumulative survival rates ranged from 94.5% to 100% over five years. The survival rates of implants placed using digitally-designed static surgical guides are comparable to the estimated overall survival rate (95.6% over five years), despite the complex nature of the treatments done with guided surgery. Clinicians who do these operations should, however, have the experience and ability to revert to conventional freehand techniques if complications arise.
Copyright © 2019 The British Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CBCT guide; digitally-designed guide; implant survival; static surgical guide

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31917014     DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2019.12.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0266-4356            Impact factor:   1.651


  2 in total

1.  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

2.  Accuracy of digital planning in zygomatic implants.

Authors:  B Xing Gao; O Iglesias-Velázquez; F G F Tresguerres; A Rodríguez González Cortes; I F Tresguerres; R Ortega Aranegui; R M López-Pintor; J López-Quiles; J Torres
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-07-22
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.