Comparison of Peri-implant Tissues Using Socket Shield Technique Versus Xenograft
Comparison of the Dimensional Changes of Hard and Soft Peri-implant Tissues Around Single Immediate Post-Extraction Implants in the Esthetic Zone With Socket Shield Technique Versus Using Xenograft: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
to compare the efficacy of the socket shield technique in counteracting the dimensional changes of the soft and hard peri-implant tissues to filliing the buccal gap with xenograft.
- Population (P): Patients with single non-restorable tooth in the esthetic zone.
- Intervention (I): Immediate implant placement with socket shield technique.
- Comparator (C): Immediate implant placement and filling the buccal gap with xenograft.
- Primary Outcome (O): Pink Esthetic Score (PES) (Fürhauser et al., 2005).
- Time frame: 9 months (Chu et al., 2015).
- Study design: Randomized controlled clinical trial.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Anticipated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Phase 3
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Mohamed A Abd El Moneium, Ass.lecturer
- Phone Number: 002 01224302609
- Email: matef1989@gmail.com
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Ahmed H El Barbary, A. professor
- Phone Number: 002 01223153678
- Email: ahmedelbarbary102@hotmail.com
Study Locations
-
-
-
Cairo, Egypt, 141
- Recruiting
- Cairo University
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patient's age was 18 years or older.
- Non-restorable tooth in the upper inter-bicuspid area.
- Adequate bone volume for the placement of immediate implant.
- Following tooth extraction, there was an intact socket bony wall (type I extraction socket).
- Primary stability of the implant was achieved at the time of the implant placement.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients who reported tobacco use in the past 5 years.
- Patients who had severe periodontal destruction at the site of implant placement.
- The presence of any signs of acute infection in the surgical site or the adjacent two natural teeth.
- Patients who had history of any systemic disease that precludes the placement of implants.
- Any disease that might affect bone metabolism as osteoporosis.
- Patients taking medications that might affect bone turn over as bisphosphonates.
- Physically or mentally handicapped patients.
- Pregnant females.
- Teeth with vertical root fractures on the buccal aspect
- Teeth with any other pathologies affecting the buccal part of the root, for example, external or internal resorptions.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: experimental
immediate implant with socket shield technique
|
immediate implant placement with buccal part of the root is retained
|
|
Active Comparator: control
immediate implant placement with filling the buccal gap with xenograft
|
immediate implant placement with filling the buccal gap with xenograft
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
pink esthetic score
Time Frame: 9 months
|
Pink esthetic score evaluates the soft tissue esthetics around implant supported crowns.
Using a 0-1-2 scoring system, 0 being the lowest, 2 being the highest value.
The maximum achievable PES is 14. 7 variables are measured: mesial and distal papillae being 0 if absent, 1 if incomplete and 2 if complete.
Alveolar process, soft tissue level, contour, texture and color being 0 if major discrepancy, 1 if minor discrepancy and 2 if matches the contralateral
|
9 months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Recession of the buccal peri-implant mucosa
Time Frame: 9 months
|
measured at the apical zenith of the mucosal margin on the implants after digital superimposition of the optically scanned models as the vertical distance change between the former and the new position of soft tissue margins.
|
9 months
|
|
Corono-apical peri-implant bone dimensional changes
Time Frame: 6 months
|
measured at the middle of the buccal implant surface after the superimposition of Cone Beam C.T scans as the difference between the former and new vertical distance from the implant platform to the buccal alveolar crest
|
6 months
|
|
Bucco-lingual peri-implant bone dimensional changes
Time Frame: 6 months
|
measured at middle of the buccal implant surface 1mm below the alveolar crest after the superimposition of the Cone Beam C.T scans as the difference between the former and new horizontal distance between the buccal and the palatal plate of bone
|
6 months
|
|
Patient satisfaction: VAS
Time Frame: 9 months
|
Patient satisfaction will be evaluated using a questionnaire which is based on a visual analog scale (VAS).
A horizontal VAS bar, 100 mm long, with the right anchor labeled "much less than natural teeth" which is marked by zero and the left anchor labeled "much more" which is marked by 10 will be used.
Five questions will be formulated to record the patients' satisfaction in terms of functionality and from an esthetic point of view.
Participants will look in a mirror and also be viewed a photograph before recording their answers on the horizontal calibrated line.
|
9 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Study Chair: Amr F Zahran, Professor, Professor in Department of Oral Medicine and Periodontology
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Baumer D, Zuhr O, Rebele S, Hurzeler M. Socket Shield Technique for immediate implant placement - clinical, radiographic and volumetric data after 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Nov;28(11):1450-1458. doi: 10.1111/clr.13012. Epub 2017 Mar 23.
- Bramanti E, Norcia A, Cicciu M, Matacena G, Cervino G, Troiano G, Zhurakivska K, Laino L. Postextraction Dental Implant in the Aesthetic Zone, Socket Shield Technique Versus Conventional Protocol. J Craniofac Surg. 2018 Jun;29(4):1037-1041. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000004419.
- Mitsias ME, Siormpas KD, Kotsakis GA, Ganz SD, Mangano C, Iezzi G. The Root Membrane Technique: Human Histologic Evidence after Five Years of Function. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:7269467. doi: 10.1155/2017/7269467. Epub 2017 Nov 22.
- Siormpas KD, Mitsias ME, Kontsiotou-Siormpa E, Garber D, Kotsakis GA. Immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone utilizing the "root-membrane" technique: clinical results up to 5 years postloading. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 Nov-Dec;29(6):1397-405. doi: 10.11607/jomi.3707. Epub 2014 Sep 26.
- Tan Z, Kang J, Liu W, Wang H. The effect of the heights and thicknesses of the remaining root segments on buccal bone resorption in the socket-shield technique: An experimental study in dogs. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018 Jun;20(3):352-359. doi: 10.1111/cid.12588. Epub 2018 Feb 8.
- Atef M, El Barbary A, Dahrous MSE, Zahran AF. Comparison of the soft and hard peri-implant tissue dimensional changes around single immediate implants in the esthetic zone with socket shield technique versus using xenograft: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2021 Jun;23(3):456-465. doi: 10.1111/cid.13008. Epub 2021 May 24.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Anticipated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Anticipated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- CairoU12
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.