Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Stored L-PRF membranes: safety, morphology, tensile properties, and cell viability-an in vitro pilot study.

Scientific reports·2026
Same author

Systemic Antibiotics in the Surgical Treatment of Peri-Implantitis: Impact on the Salivary Microbiome.

Journal of clinical periodontology·2026
Same author

Peri-implantitis Risk Assessment (PiRA) Part 1: Umbrella Review of a Multifactorial Disease with Many Risk Factors.

The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants·2025
Same author

Peri-implantitis Risk Assessment (PiRA) Part 2: Retrospective Study and Framework for an Evidence-Based Prediction Model for Clinicians.

The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants·2025
Same author

Vertical Guided Bone Regeneration: Leukocyte and PRF Bone Block vs a Mixture of Autogenous Bone with DBBM: A Split-Mouth Randomized Controlled Trial with up to 1 Year of Follow-up After Implant Loading.

The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry·2025
Same author

Horizontal Guided Bone Regeneration: L-PRF Bone Block Versus a Mixture of Autogenous Bone with Deproteinized Bovine Bone Mineral-A Split-Mouth RCT Study with a 25-Month Follow-up.

The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 25, 2026

Optimizing Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: A Fully 3D CT O-Arm Navigated Workflow in MIS TLIF
08:34

Optimizing Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: A Fully 3D CT O-Arm Navigated Workflow in MIS TLIF

Published on: October 17, 2025

915

Guided surgery: accuracy and efficacy.

Marjolein Vercruyssen, Margareta Hultin, Nele Van Assche

    Periodontology 2000
    |August 16, 2014
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Computer-assisted dental implant surgery offers improved accuracy over freehand methods, with typical deviations around ±2.0 mm. Further research is needed to optimize guiding systems and reporting standards for enhanced precision.

    More Related Videos

    Author Spotlight: Segmentation and VR for Advanced Neurovascular Interventions
    06:18

    Author Spotlight: Segmentation and VR for Advanced Neurovascular Interventions

    Published on: April 5, 2024

    1.9K
    A Spine Robotic-Assisted Navigation System for Pedicle Screw Placement
    06:24

    A Spine Robotic-Assisted Navigation System for Pedicle Screw Placement

    Published on: May 11, 2020

    8.4K

    Related Experiment Videos

    Last Updated: Apr 25, 2026

    Optimizing Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: A Fully 3D CT O-Arm Navigated Workflow in MIS TLIF
    08:34

    Optimizing Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery: A Fully 3D CT O-Arm Navigated Workflow in MIS TLIF

    Published on: October 17, 2025

    915
    Author Spotlight: Segmentation and VR for Advanced Neurovascular Interventions
    06:18

    Author Spotlight: Segmentation and VR for Advanced Neurovascular Interventions

    Published on: April 5, 2024

    1.9K
    A Spine Robotic-Assisted Navigation System for Pedicle Screw Placement
    06:24

    A Spine Robotic-Assisted Navigation System for Pedicle Screw Placement

    Published on: May 11, 2020

    8.4K

    Area of Science:

    • Dentistry
    • Medical Technology
    • Surgical Navigation

    Background:

    • Various computer-assisted implant placement systems exist, differing in software, template fabrication, and fixation methods.
    • Current literature suggests an acceptable inaccuracy of approximately ±2.0 mm for guided surgery, which is superior to non-guided procedures.
    • Achieving sub-0.5 mm accuracy remains a significant challenge in computer-assisted implantology.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To review the current landscape of computer-assisted implant placement procedures.
    • To identify limitations and inconsistencies in existing research on guided implant surgery.
    • To highlight the need for further research, including randomized clinical trials, to determine optimal guiding systems and parameters for accuracy.

    Main Methods:

    • Literature review of computer-assisted implant-placement procedures.
    • Analysis of available software, template manufacturing, guiding devices, stabilization, and fixation techniques.
    • Evaluation of reported accuracy data and study limitations.

    Main Results:

    • Computer-assisted implant placement demonstrates higher accuracy than non-guided surgery, with typical deviations around ±2.0 mm.
    • Significant challenges exist in reducing inaccuracy below 0.5 mm.
    • A major limitation across studies is the inconsistent reporting of clinical data and outcomes.

    Conclusions:

    • Further randomized clinical trials are essential to identify the most effective guiding systems and critical parameters for achieving optimal accuracy in computer-assisted implant placement.
    • Standardization of data reporting and inclusion of cost-effectiveness and patient-centered evaluations are crucial for future research.
    • While current guided surgery offers improved accuracy, further advancements are needed to minimize deviations and enhance clinical data consistency.