MedTrace Logo

The Influence of Vertical Implant Position on the Marginal Bone Loss in Thick Versus Thin Phenotype.

NCT06177275 · Status: RECRUITING · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 60

Last updated 2023-12-20

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

Multiple clinical studies have established high survival rates and tremendous predictability of dental implant treatment (Schiegnitz and Al-Nawas 2018). However, a pleasant esthetic outcome is the patient's primary expectation regarding implants in the esthetic zone (Vermylen et al. 2003)and several esthetic factors have been evaluated to contribute to an esthetic appearance. Among these, the midfacial soft tissue level is considered to be one of the most important factors; Cosyn and co-workers reported that among factors including soft tissue phenotype, the midfacial recession was associated with the position of the implant (Cosyn et al. 2012).

Therefore, subcrestal implant placement has been advocated as it has been associated with the reduction of crestal bone loss in cases with decreased soft tissue thickness. If the vertical soft tissues on the crest of the alveolar ridge are 2 mm or less at the time of implant placement, implants will undergo unavoidable bone resorption by establishing sufficient biologic protection. Another option was proposed by Linkevicius et al, who introduced the subcrestal implant placement as a method to accommodate the problem of thin soft tissues.(Linkevicius et al. 2020).

Limiting the extent of peri-implant bone loss has been recognized for decades to be an important aspect of long-term implant success, and stable peri-implant bone conditions play an important role in maintaining esthetics (Laurell and Lundgren, 2011).

The opinion expressed widely in the scientific literature has been that subcrestal implant placement leads to increased crestal bone resorption. However, clinical studies addressing the implant placement depth in relation to crestal bone have been rare. Data on subcrestal versus crestal placement have mostly come from animal studies. Even fewer data are available regarding the effects of crestal versus subcrestal positioning of platform-switched implants (Cochran et al., 2009).

This study aims to compare the effect of different vertical implant position with immediate provisionalization on marginal bone loss thin and thick vertical tissue biotype.

Conditions

  • Dental Implant
  • Vertical Position
  • Esthetic Zone
  • Bounded Edentulous Area

Interventions

PROCEDURE

Placement of BLX implants 2 mm sub-crestal i

Placement of BLX implants 2 mm sub-crestal in single missing anterior or premolar teeth in the esthetic zone with immediate provisionalization via a straight emergence profile temporary crown on a temporary abutment.

PROCEDURE

Placement of BLX implants equicrestal

Placement of BLX implants equicrestal in single missing anterior or premolar teeth in the esthetic zone with immediate provisionalization via a straight emergence profile temporary crown on a temporary abutment.

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • Cairo University

    lead OTHER

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age
21 Years
Max Age
65 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2023-12-01
Primary Completion
2024-12-30
Completion
2025-02-01

Countries

  • Egypt

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT06177275 on ClinicalTrials.gov