Accuracy and patient‐centered outcome variables in guided implant surgery: a RCT comparing immediate with delayed loading
Open accessAbstract
Aim: To assess the accuracy and patient‐centered outcome of a novel guided surgery system for placing implants in an edentulous maxilla. Material and methods: Fifteen consecutive patients with sufficient bone to place six implants in the maxilla were randomly assigned to the immediate loading (with delivery of the final prosthesis within 24 h) or the delayed loading treatment group. Accuracy was assessed by matching the planning CT with a postoperative CBCT . Patient‐centered outcome measures were the Dutch version of the McGill Pain Questionnaire ( MPQ ‐ DLV ), the health‐related quality of life instrument ( HRQOL ), visual analog scales ( VAS ), the duration of the procedure, and the analgesic doses taken each day. Results: A mean deviation was found at the entry point of 0.9 mm (range: 0.1–4.5, median 0.8) and of 1.2 mm (range: 0.2–4.9, median 1.1) at the apex, and an angular deviation of 2.7° (range: 0.0–6.6°, median 2.3) was observed. The mean vertical deviation was 0.5 mm (range: 0.0–3.2, median 0.4), and in a horizontal direction, this was 0.7 mm (range: 0.1–3.1, median 0.6). The mean deviation in mesio‐distal direction was 0.5 mm (range: 0.0–2.3, median 0.4) and in bucco‐lingual direction 0.5 mm ± 0.4 (range: 0.0–2.2, median 0.3). No statistical differences could be shown between treatment groups on pain response ( MPQ ‐ DLV ), treatment perception ( VAS ), number or kind of pain killers, or for the HRQOLI instrument. Conclusion: The accuracy of a novel CT ‐based guide is comparable to the accuracy data of other systems. Within the limitations of this study, no difference could be found in patient‐centered outcome variables after immediate or delayed loading.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 12
- De Bruyn, H., Raes, S., Ostman, P.O. & Cosyn, J. (2014) Immediate loading in partially and completely eden- tulous jaws: a review of the literature with clinical guidelines. Periodontology 2000 66: 153-187.
- Hultin, M., Svensson, K.G. & Trulsson, M. (2012) Clinical advantages of computer-guided implant placement: a systematic review. Clinical Oral Implants Research 23: 124-135.
- Maes, F., Collignon, A., Vandermeulen, D., Mar- chal, G. & Suetens, P. (1997) Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imag- ing 16: 187-198.
- Shugars, D.A., Benson, K., White, R.P., Jr, Simpson, K.N. & Bader, J.D. (1996) Developing a measure of patient perceptions of short-term outcomes of third molar surgery. Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery 54: 1402-1408.
- Sid ak, Z. (1967) Rectangular confidence regions for the means of multivariate normal distributions. Journal of American Statistical Association 62: 626-633.
- Tahmaseb, A., Wismeijer, D., Coucke, W. & Derk- sen, W. (2014) Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. International Journal of Oral Maxillofa- cial Implants. 29: 25-42.
- Vercruyssen, M., Coucke, W., Naert, I., Jacobs, R. & Quirynen, M. (2014a) Depth and lateral devia- tions in guided implant surgery: an RCT compar- ing guided surgery with mental navigation 1 or the use of a pilot-drill template. Clinical Oral Implants Research. doi: 10.1111/clr.12460. [Epub ahead of print]. · DOI
- Vercruyssen, M., Cox, C., Coucke, W., Naert, I., Jacobs, R. & Quirynen, M. (2014b) An RCT com- paring guided implant surgery (bone or mucosa supported) with mental navigation or the use of a pilot-drill template. Journal of Clinical Periodon- tology 41: 717-723.
- Vercruyssen, M., De Laat, A., Coucke, W. & Quirynen, M. (2014c) An RCT comparing patient-centred out- come variables of guided surgery (bone or mucosa supported) with conventional implant placement. Journal of Clinical Periodontology 41: 724-732.
- Vercruyssen, M., Jacobs, R., van Assche, N. & van Steenberghe, D. (2008) The use of CT scan based planning for oral rehabilitation by means of implants and its transfer to the surgical field: a critical review on accuracy. Journal of Oral Reha- bilitation 35: 454-474.
- Verstreken, K., Van Cleynenbreugel, J., Marchal, G., Naert, I., Suetens, P. & van Steenberghe D. (1996) Computer-assisted planning of oral implant surgery: a three-dimensional approach. International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants 11: 806-810.
- Verstreken, K., Van Cleynenbreugel, J., Martens, K., Marchal, G., van Steenberghe, G. & Suetens P. (1998) An image-guided planning system for endosseous oral implants. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 17: 842-852.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Pannuti, C. M., Hassan, M. A., Reis, I. N. R., Villar, C. C., Francisco, H., & Romito, G. A. (2026) · Clinical Oral Implants Research · doi:10.1111/clr.14451 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Vercruyssen, M., Cox, C., Naert, I., Jacobs, R., Teughels, W., & Quirynen, M.
- Affiliations
- Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven (BE)
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Vercruyssen, Marjolein
- Venue
- Clinical Oral Implants Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-03-28
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 427-432
- ISSN
- 0905-7161 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0501
- OpenAlex
- W2087694717
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 1.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Clinical Oral Implants Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
- Vlaamse regering
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Dental Radiography and Imaging
- Health Sciences › Dentistry › Orthodontics › Dental materials and restorations
- Keywords
- guided implant surgery, immediate implant loading, delayed implant loading, edentulous maxilla, implant placement accuracy, patient-centered outcomes, pain, health-related quality of life
- MeSH terms
- Dental Implantation, Endosseous, Humans, Maxilla, Mouth, Edentulous, Quality of Life, Treatment Outcome, Immediate Dental Implant Loading, Patient Outcome Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review