Accuracy of Implant Guided Surgery in Fully Edentulous Patients: Prediction vs. Actual Outcome—Systematic Review

Abstract

Objectives: Examine deviations between the digitally planned and actual implant positions in clinical studies using static fully guided surgical guides. Identify potential associated factors and strategies to minimize their likelihood. Materials and Methods: This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA checklist. The literature search was conducted in the PubMed® and Scopus® databases up to February 2024 following the PICOS search strategy. Clinical trials conducted between 2013 and 2024, evaluating the accuracy of static fully guided surgical guides placed in fully edentulous patients, were included. The studies had to assess at least two of the following parameters: angular deviation, cervical deviation, apical deviation, and depth deviation. Results: Out of the 298 articles initially searched, six randomized clinical trials and three clinical trials were included. All but one article used mucosa-supported guides; the remaining one used bone-supported guides. Apical deviations were more significant than cervical deviations, and implants tended to be placed too superficially. The greatest mean deviations were 2.01 ± 0.77 mm for cervical and 2.41 ± 1.45 mm for apical deviations, with the largest angular deviation recorded at 4.98 ± 2.16°. Conclusions: The accuracy of the surgical guide is influenced by various factors, including the technique of image acquisition and subsequent planning, guide support methods, and the adopted surgical protocol. Apical deviations are influenced by cervical and angular deviations. Additionally, deviations were more pronounced in the mandible. Further studies with similar methodologies are necessary for a more precise assessment of the different factors and for establishing safety margins.