Primary study · included by 1 review

The palpator: an instrument for measuring the positions of bones in three dimensions.

Sun 2023 · Pronk G M, van der Helm F C · Journal of medical engineering & technology · 1991

Included by

Outcome this study informsPooled effectEvidenceCertainty
Prevalence of undercut (U) ridge morphology
Immediate implant placement planning at the mandibular second molar (CBCT anatomical assessment) vs None (no comparator)
Pooled prevalence (%) 73 [62.5, 81.4]5 studiesGRADE not reported
Prevalence of parallel (P) ridge morphology
Immediate implant placement planning at the mandibular first and second molars combined (CBCT anatomical assessment) vs None (no comparator)
Pooled prevalence (%) 25.2 [17.5, 34.9]3 studiesGRADE not reported
Prevalence of convergent (C) ridge morphology
Immediate implant placement planning at the mandibular first molar (CBCT anatomical assessment) vs None (no comparator)
Pooled prevalence (%) 29.5 [20.1, 41.1]5 studiesGRADE not reported
Prevalence of undercut (U) ridge morphology
Immediate implant placement planning at the mandibular first and second molars combined (CBCT anatomical assessment) vs None (no comparator)
Pooled prevalence (%) 49.2 [40.3, 58.2]3 studiesGRADE not reported
Prevalence of undercut (U) ridge morphology
Immediate implant placement planning at the mandibular first molar (CBCT anatomical assessment) vs None (no comparator)
Pooled prevalence (%) 41.1 [27.6, 56]5 studiesGRADE not reported
Prevalence of parallel (P) ridge morphology
Immediate implant placement planning at the mandibular second molar (CBCT anatomical assessment) vs None (no comparator)
Pooled prevalence (%) 15.4 [8.6, 26.1]5 studiesGRADE not reported
Prevalence of convergent (C) ridge morphology
Immediate implant placement planning at the mandibular first and second molars combined (CBCT anatomical assessment) vs None (no comparator)
Pooled prevalence (%) 25 [17.9, 33.7]3 studiesGRADE not reported
Prevalence of parallel (P) ridge morphology
Immediate implant placement planning at the mandibular first molar (CBCT anatomical assessment) vs None (no comparator)
Pooled prevalence (%) 35 [20.8, 52.6]5 studiesGRADE not reported
Prevalence of convergent (C) ridge morphology
Immediate implant placement planning at the mandibular second molar (CBCT anatomical assessment) vs None (no comparator)
Pooled prevalence (%) 9 [4, 18.9]5 studiesGRADE not reported

1 including review in total.