The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Accuracy of computer‐aided implant placement
Open accessAbstract
Aim: To assess the accuracy of static computer‐guided implant placement. Material and methods: Electronic and manual literature searches were conducted to collect information on the accuracy of static computer‐guided implant placement and meta‐regression analyses were performed to summarize and analyse the overall accuracy. The latter included a search for correlations between factors such as: support (teeth/mucosa/bone), number of templates, use of fixation pins, jaw, template production, guiding system, guided implant placement. Results: Nineteen accuracy studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta analysis revealed a mean error of 0.99 mm (ranging from 0 to 6.5 mm) at the entry point and of 1.24 mm (ranging from 0 to 6.9 mm) at the apex. The mean angular deviation was 3.81° (ranging from 0 to 24.9°). Significant differences for all deviation parameters was found for implant‐guided placement compared to placement without guidance. Number of templates used was significant, influencing the apical and angular deviation in favour for the single template. Study design and jaw location had no significant effect. Less deviation was found when more fixation pins were used (significant for entry). Conclusion: Computer‐guided implant placement can be accurate, but significant deviations have to be taken into account. Randomized studies are needed to analyse the impact of individual parameters in order to allow optimization of this technique. Moreover, a clear overview on indications and benefits would help the clinicians to find the right candidates.
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
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
Self-citationBover-Ramos, F., Viña-Almunia, J., Cervera-Ballester, J., Peñarrocha-Diago, M., & García-Mira, B. (2018) · The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants · doi:10.11607/jomi.5556 · Cited by 305
Vercruyssen, M., Cox, C., Naert, I., Jacobs, R., Teughels, W., & Quirynen, M. (2016) · Clinical Oral Implants Research · doi:10.1111/clr.12583 · Cited by 29
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Van Assche, N., Vercruyssen, M., Coucke, W., Teughels, W., Jacobs, R., & Quirynen, M.
- Venue
- Clinical Oral Implants Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-10
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- s6
- Pages
- 112-123
- ISSN
- 0905-7161 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0501
- OpenAlex
- W2028923312
- Cited by
- 328
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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 of computer‐aided implant placement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02552.x
- The paper
- Van Assche, N., Vercruyssen, M., Coucke, W., Teughels, W., Jacobs, R., & Quirynen, M. (2012). Accuracy of computer‐aided implant placement. Clinical Oral Implants Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02552.x
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.