Full‐Arch Implant‐Supported Fixed Dental Prosthesis Retained by a Combination of Galvano‐Telescopic Copings and Screws: A Clinical Report

Full‐arch screw‐retained implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses have a high long‐term success rate and are considered the gold standard by many clinicians. However, accurate fabrication of a passive fit long‐span prosthesis can be challenging. A novel intraoral adhesion method using galvano‐telescopic copings was proposed as a way of improving prosthetic fit for edentulous patients. This report describes the treatment of a 74‐year‐old female with a full‐arch implant‐supported dental prosthesis, supported by a combination of galvano‐telescopic copings and screws to prevent retention loss. Four years have passed since this superstructure was placed, during this time she exhibited a good clinical course with no inflammation noted in surrounding tissues. Treatment with an implant‐supported fixed dental prosthesis, retained by a combination of galvano‐telescopic copings and screws, can be a useful alternative treatment for edentulous patients.     

Clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness of computer‐guided versus conventional implant‐retained hybrid prostheses: A long‐term retrospective analysis of treatment protocols

1 Background

Computer‐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 computer‐guided surgery impedes its routine practice. The aim of this study is to evaluate survival rates and complications associated with computer‐guided versus conventional implant placement in implant‐retained hybrid prostheses. Furthermore, long‐term economic efficiency of this approach was assessed.

2 Methods

Patients were stratified according to implant placement protocol into a test group, using computer‐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.

3 Results

Forty‐five patients (149 implants in the test group and 111 implants in the control group) with a minimum follow‐up of 5 years, and a mean follow‐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 < 0.001). A statistically significant difference in favor of the non‐guided implant placement group was found for the initial cost (P < 0.05) but not for the prosthetic complications and total cost (P > 0.05).

4 Conclusions

Computer‐guided implant placement for an implant‐supported hybrid prosthesis is a valid, reliable alternative to the traditional approach for implant placement and immediate loading. Computer‐guided implant placement showed higher implant survival rates and comparable long‐term cost to non‐guided implant placement.