Beyond Accuracy: Clinical Outcomes of Computer Assisted Implant Surgery

Clinical and Experimental Dental Research, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: 11(3)

Published: May 16, 2025

ABSTRACT Objectives Computer Assisted Implant Surgery (CAIS) with different technologies and modalities is becoming increasingly utilized in clinical practice. The aim of this White Paper was to synthesize evidence, reported experience, best practices regard clinically relevant outcomes static, dynamic, robotic CAIS. Materials Methods A review the literature compiled existing evidence from studies up November 2024, which later discussed synthesized into questions a panel international experts. Results There overwhelming for superiority CAIS accuracy implant placement some limited superior esthetic outcomes. At same time, related primary stability, survival rates, intra‐ postoperative complications, marginal bone loss, peri‐implant tissue health appear similar between guided non‐guided surgery, while efficiency poorly defined studied. importance execution comprehensive, prosthetically driven treatment plan not reflected most studies, focus mainly on assessment procedures rather than entire workflows. Such inherent limitations available research might conceal potential Conclusions Guided can achieve at least as good surgery. Studies that assess benefits part workflow, isolated procedures, could improve our understanding these technologies.

Language: Английский

Computer‐Assisted Implant Surgery: Patients' Experience and Perspectives

Clinical and Experimental Dental Research, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: 11(3)

Published: May 26, 2025

ABSTRACT Objectives Although computer‐assisted implant surgery (CAIS) has increased significantly the precision of dental placement, documentation impact such technologies in patient‐reported experience and outcomes remains, however, limited. The aim this white paper was to assess CAIS on key aspects patient experience, as its potential benefits (1) patients' understanding engagement with surgery, (2) patient's confidence treatment outcomes, (3) preferences, (4) intra‐ (5) Postoperative (6) long‐term oral health‐related quality life. Material Methods A review literature compiled existing evidence from clinical studies up November 2024, which later discussed synthesized expert opinions best currently documented practice. Results No found that improves or while comparative showed no difference postoperative when is used. Impact cost procedures patients perceptions preferences also not been explored, majority subsidizing costs, particular randomized trials. At same time, compare interventions cannot overall a complex workflow immediacy minimally invasive approaches, an essential part. Conclusions Research might fully reflect these limited level surgical intervention. Major anticipated for reduce complexity facilitate faster, safer more predictable execution digitally designed treatments, could be better approached future by aimed at assessing entire workflows.

Language: Английский