A systematic review and meta-analysis of accuracy between protrusive interocclusal record and horizontal condylar guidance angle recording methods in dentulous patients.

AIM

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the accuracy of different methods used for measuring horizontal condylar guidance (HCG) angle in comparison with protrusive interocclusal record (IOR) for dentulous patients.

SETTINGS AND DESIGN

The design involves systematic review and meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was carried out by two reviewers in the Google Scholar search engine and the EBSCO host, Cochrane Library, and PubMed/MEDLINE databases for quasi-experimental studies, in vivo studies, and cross-sectional studies published from January 2005 to February 2023 determining the HCG angle in dentulous patients.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED

Meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the quantitative data.

RESULTS

A total of 577 articles were identified, 29 analytical cross-sectional studies that fulfilled the eligibility criteria were included for qualitative synthesis and 26 studies were included for meta-analysis. A statistically significant difference was observed for the right and left HCG angles obtained by the panoramic radiograph method and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) method and for the right side HCG angle obtained by cephalogram method showing higher values than the protrusive IOR method. No statistically significant difference was observed for the left side HCG angle obtained by the cephalogram method and both the right and left side HCG angles obtained by the intraoral tracer method.

CONCLUSIONS

The panoramic radiograph, cephalogram, and CBCT obtained higher HCG angles in dentulous patients than the protrusive IOR method.