Static and Dynamic computer assisted implant surgery appear to deliver the same level of accuracy if we study the average deviation. But this is only half the truth. By analysing frequencies instead of the mean we could see some important differences and clinical implications, as it becomes obvious that both dynamic and static CAIS will deliver “plug and play” immediacy in 40% of the cases, as opposed to only 10% for freehand. If we extend to include the small modification group then we see CAIS serving successfully as much as 80% of the cases! Think of the time and resources saved, the logistics and the patient experience and you have already a major benefit of CAIS, certainly not described in the previously reported means. That is of course if you follow an immediacy procedure. With a conventional loading protocol, the benefit of CAIS is probably not that important in clinical terms.
Computer Assisted Implant Surgery is increasingly popular, with almost every implant system racing to deliver the most reliable technology and protocols. Either as static or dynamic, CAIS promises unprecedented accuracy in implant placement and evidence now shows that it delivers. But is it just about accuracy? How reliable is this technology and how important is a millimetre after all? Is it worth the cost and trouble? Can this technology transform the way we practice implant dentistry, or will it remain a premium gadget mainly targeting complex cases in ‘up-market’ clinics?
These were some of our genuine questions when we embarked in a long project assessing computer assisted surgical technology in practice. If you share these questions, then the article that follows is for you!