Flapless Guided Implant Surgeries Compared with Conventional Surgeries Performed by Nonexperienced Individuals: Randomized and Controlled Split-Mouth Clinical Trial

Minimal invasiveness at dental implant placement: A systematic review with meta‐analyses on flapless fully guided surgery

“…When possible, MD and SEs were calculated from individual patient data (IPD) either reported in the publication 24 or provided by the authors after correspondence [25][26][27] ; for one trial, MD and SEs were directly provided by the authors after correspondence. 28 In one RCT with a parallel-group design, [29][30][31][32][33] MD and SEs were calculated from crude means and standard deviations for each study group by using the appropriate formula to account for clustering, considering an intraclass correlation coefficient of .05. 9,34 For binary variables, crude numbers were considered because of the presence of 0 events in at least one group of each possible comparison, which prevented any synthesis by means of effect measures (eg, risk ratios).…”

“…Three of the included trials had a split-mouth design 24,25,28 and two had a parallel design with clustering (ie, multiple implants in the same randomized participant). 26,[29][30][31][32][33] Four RCTs were monocentric and carried out in university settings, 24,25,[28][29][30][31][32][33] while the remaining one was bi-centric taking place at both a university and a private practice.…”

“…Sample size varied from 10 participants (20 implants) 24,28 to 60 participants (314 implants). [29][30][31][32][33] Only two trials declared the inclusion of current smokers (<20% of the included participants).…”

“…[29][30][31][32][33] Only two trials declared the inclusion of current smokers (<20% of the included participants). 26,27,[29][30][31][32][33] Two trials only included mandibular single-tooth gaps, 25,28 one trial only single-tooth gaps but from both arches, 24 one trial only maxillary multiple adjacent missing teeth, 26,27 and the other one only maxillary and mandibular similarly distributed edentulous arches. [29][30][31][32][33] Table S2 lists the inclusion and exclusion criteria reported in the included RCTs.…”

“…Finally, 10 publications reporting results from five RCTs and a total of 124 participants (449 implants) met the inclusion criteria and were then included in this systematic review. [24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]…”