Evaluation of condylar position displacement using various centric relation recording techniques based on maximum intercuspation position: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Restoring tooth defects is a key clinical task for dentists, aimed at either maintaining or reconstructing a functional occlusal dentition. This study conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing centric relation (CR) and maximum intercuspal position (MIP) condylar positions obtained using various CR techniques, and to verify the reproducibility of these methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles published before January 2026. The single-arm meta-analysis used a random-effects model to calculate the overall effect size. RESULTS: This study included 12 articles published between 1994 and 2024. Five different types of CR recording techniques were analyzed. Most techniques showed slight differences in CR and MIP with moderate to high heterogeneity. The chin-point guidance technique demonstrated a significant difference in the Y-axis (SMD = 1.17, P = 0.02), but no statistically significant differences were observed in the X and Z axes between CR and MIP. Roth's power-centric relation recording method was the only technique to show significant differences relative to MIP in all three axes. Dawson's bimanual method and Gothic arch tracer method for CR recording did not reveal any significant differences in condylar position on any axis. CONCLUSION: While the various methods for obtaining CR records in this study have their own advantages and disadvantages, and the CR positions obtained differed among the techniques, they all demonstrated a certain degree of reproducibility.