ArticleJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]2025
Comparing Medium to Long-Term Esthetic, Clinical, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Between Freehand and Computer-Assisted Dental Implant Placement: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety and feasibility of immediate implant placement in diabetic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Biomedical reports · 2026Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of transmucosal probe visualization for peri-implant mucosal phenotype assessment: A cross-sectional study.Journal of periodontology · 2026Article
- Digital Dentistry in Clinical Practice: A Scoping Review of Current Capabilities and Future Directions.International dental journal · 2026Article
- The accuracy of dental implant placement with different computer-assisted implant surgery techniques.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Static-Computer Assisted Implant Surgery: Where Are We Now?Australian dental journal · 2025Review
- Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: Patients' Experience and Perspectives.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025Review
- Beyond Accuracy: Clinical Outcomes of Computer Assisted Implant Surgery.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe 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
methodsThirty 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.
resultsCAIS 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.
conclusionsThe 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.