The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Accuracy comparison of guided surgery for dental implants according to the tissue of support: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
Abstract
Aim: To systematically assess the current dental literature comparing the accuracy of computer‐aided implant surgery when using different supporting tissues (tooth, mucosa, or bone). Material and Methods: Two reviewers searched PubMed (1972 to January 2015) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central) (2002 to January 2015). For the assessment of accuracy, studies were included with the following outcome measures: (i) angle deviation, (ii) deviation at the entry point, and (iii) deviation at the apex. Results: Eight clinical studies from the 1602 articles initially identified met the inclusion criteria for the qualitative analysis. Four studies (n = 599 implants) were evaluated using meta‐analysis. The bone‐supported guides showed a statistically significant greater deviation in angle (P < 0.001), entry point (P = 0.01), and the apex (P = 0.001) when compared to the tooth‐supported guides. Conversely, when only retrospective studies were analyzed, not significant differences are revealed in the deviation of the entry point and apex. The mucosa‐supported guides indicated a statistically significant greater reduction in angle deviation (P = 0.02), deviation at the entry point (P = 0.002), and deviation at the apex (P = 0.04) when compared to the bone‐supported guides. Between the mucosa‐ and tooth‐supported guides, there were no statistically significant differences for any of the outcome measures. Conclusions: It can be concluded that the tissue of the guide support influences the accuracy of computer‐aided implant surgery.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Citations
Cites
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006 · Cited by 10,578
Cited by
Cone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: recommendations for clinical use
Jacobs, R., Salmon, B., Codari, M., Hassan, B., & Bornstein, M. M. (2018) · BMC Oral Health · doi:10.1186/s12903-018-0523-5 · Cited by 521
Gellrich, N.-C., Zimmerer, R. M., Spalthoff, S., Jehn, P., Pott, P.-C., Rana, M., & Rahlf, B. (2017) · Journal of Cranio-Maxillofacial Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2017.07.022 · Cited by 75
Metadata
- Authors
- Raico Gallardo, Y. N., da Silva‐Olivio, I. R. T., Mukai, E., Morimoto, S., Sesma, N., & Cordaro, L.
- Venue
- Clinical Oral Implants Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-04-08
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 602-612
- ISSN
- 0905-7161 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0501
- OpenAlex
- W2329011472
- Cited by
- 259
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Accuracy comparison of guided surgery for dental implants according to the tissue of support: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/clr.12841
- The paper
- Raico Gallardo, Y. N., da Silva‐Olivio, I. R. T., Mukai, E., Morimoto, S., Sesma, N., & Cordaro, L. (2017). Accuracy comparison of guided surgery for dental implants according to the tissue of support: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Clinical Oral Implants Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12841
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.