To evaluate the surgical accuracy of zygomatic implant placement using virtual surgical planning with surgical guides and dynamic navigation compared with conventional freehand techniques.

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Ovid, and Embase from inception to the search date using MeSH, Emtree, and free-text terms related to zygomatic implants, guided surgery, navigation, and surgical accuracy. Clinical and in vitro studies assessing the accuracy of guided or navigated zygomatic implant placement compared with conventional freehand techniques were included. Two independent reviewers screened studies using Rayyan. Risk of bias was assessed with ROB2, CRIS, and JBI tools according to study design. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Primary outcomes were linear deviations (mm) at the entry point and apex and angular deviation (°), comparing planned and final implant positions.

Twenty-five studies were included (2 randomized clinical trials, 4 cohort studies, 6 case series, 3 case reports, and 10 in vitro studies). In clinical trials, dynamic navigation showed mean deviations of 2.28 mm (95% CI: 1.74–2.82) at the entry point, 3.23 mm (95% CI: 2.60–3.86) at the apex, and an angular deviation of 3.23° (95% CI: 2.60–3.86). Case series reported the lowest angular deviation with surgical guides (0.88°; 95% CI: 0.70–1.05). In vitro studies consistently demonstrated lower deviations with surgical guides than with conventional freehand techniques.

Virtual surgical planning with surgical guides and dynamic navigation appears to improve the accuracy of zygomatic implant placement compared with conventional freehand techniques. However, the available clinical evidence remains limited and heterogeneous, highlighting the need for well-designed prospective clinical studies to confirm these findings.