Clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness of computerâ guided versus conventional implantâ retained hybrid prostheses: A longâ term retrospective analysis of treatment protocols

BackgroundComputerâ guided systems were developed to facilitate implant placement at optimal positions in relation to the future prosthesis. However, the time, cost and, technique sensitivity involved with computerâ guided surgery impedes its routine practice. The aim of this study is to evaluate survival rates and complications associated with computerâ guided versus conventional implant placement in implantâ retained hybrid prostheses. Furthermore, longâ term economic efficiency of this approach was assessed.MethodsPatients were stratified according to implant placement protocol into a test group, using computerâ guided placement, and a control group, using traditional placement. Calibrated radiographs were used to measure bone loss around implants. Furthermore, the costs of the initial treatment and prosthetic complications, if any, were standardized and analyzed.ResultsFortyâ five patients (149 implants in the test group and 111 implants in the control group) with a minimum followâ up of 5 years, and a mean followâ up of 9.6 years, were included in the study. While no significant difference was found between both groups in terms of biologic and technical complications, lower incidence of implant loss was observed in the test group (P  0.05).ConclusionsComputerâ guided implant placement for an implantâ supported hybrid prosthesis is a valid, reliable alternative to the traditional approach for implant placement and immediate loading. Computerâ guided implant placement showed higher implant survival rates and comparable longâ term cost to nonâ guided implant placement.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/145504/1/jper10157.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/145504/2/jper10157_am.pd