Accuracy of guided vs non-guided surgery in three-dimensional positioning of single implants: a rapid systematic review

Purpose To synthesize the evidence on the use of guided surgery for the placement of single implants compared to non-guided surgery, evaluating the accuracy of the 3D position of the implant, implant location and the effect of guide fabrication. Methods A rapid systematic review was conducted. Publications were taken from Medline/PubMed, LILACS, Cochrane Library and Epistemonikos. A qualitative synthesis of the included articles was performed, and for the main outcomes (coronal, apical, and angular deviation) a meta-analysis of random effects was developed for the differences in means (DM), with a con 95% confidence interval, using RevMan5.0. Results A total of 1114 articles were identified, and 13 were included. The meta-analysis indicated a statistically significant reduction in the coronal, apical and angular deviations, favoring guided surgery. Coronal deviation: DM = -0,35 mm (IC 95%: -0,55 a -0,16; p  = 0,0005). Apical deviation: DM = -0,78 mm (IC 95%: -1,06 a -0,51; p  < 0,00001). Angular deviation: DM = -3,0º (IC 95%: -4,36º a -1,65º; p  < 0,0001). The analysis showed high heterogeneity ( I ² >80%), although the results were consistent and statistically significant. Conclusion Guided surgery in any modalities (static, dynamic, or mixed) is superior to non-guided surgery in terms of results and three-dimensional precision of the position of single dental implants, in adults with edentulism.