Comparing Medium to Long-Term Esthetic, Clinical, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Between Freehand and Computer-Assisted Dental Implant Placement: A Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract

Objective

The aim of the study was to compare medium to long-term clinical and patient-reported outcomes between implants placed with computer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS) and freehand protocols.

Materials and Methods

Thirty dental implants in the anterior maxillary region with an average of 4 years after loading were assessed by means of Pink Esthetic Scores (PESs), marginal bone level (MBL), and clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

Results

CAIS significantly outperformed freehand placement with regard to PES scores (p = 0.011). Likewise, implants placed with CAIS showed significantly higher MBLs (p < 0.001). Bleeding on probing, probing depth, and prevalence of mucositis did not differ between the groups, while no peri-implantitis was diagnosed.

Conclusions

The use of CAIS leads to superior outcomes in terms of esthetics and MBLs for implants placed in the esthetic zone as observed in medium to long-term follow-up. No difference was however observed with regard to peri-implant mucosa inflammation.

Clinical Significance

This article highlights the outcome of computer-assisted implant surgery in achieving higher esthetic, MBL, and esthetic satisfaction compared to freehand implant placement.

Thai Clinical Trial Registry

TCTR20240422015.