Radiographic Evaluation of a Star-shaped Incision Technique
Radiographic Evaluation of a Star-shaped Incision Technique for Thick-gingiva and Thin-gingiva Patients Treated With Implant-supported Fixed Prosthesis: a Randomized Trial
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Sichuan
-
Chengdu, Sichuan, China, 610041
- West China Hospital of Stomatology
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Sampling Method
Study Population
Description
Inclusion criteria
- Good general health, no chronic systemic diseases.
- All subjects included in this study needed to have one missing premolar or molar teeth with adjacent natural teeth.
- All subjects included in this study had been treated with one bone-level implant insertion in the premolar or molar region. The patients had insufficient gingival papilla height (referred to contralateral natural tooth which also had insufficient gingival papilla height) and at least 2 mm of keratinized tissue width around the implant.
Exclusion criteria
- Active periodontal infections.
- Heavy smoking (> 10 cigarettes per day).
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
Number of groups / cohorts
Cohorts and Interventions
Group / CohortGroup / Cohort |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
thick-gingiva group
After the insertion of the probe into the facial aspect of the sulcus through the gingival margin, the simple visual method is based on the transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin while probing the buccal sulcus at the midfacial aspect of the tooth.
When the outline of the underlying periodontal probe can't be seen through the gingival, the gingival phenotype is considered thick.
|
|
|
thin-gingiva group
After the insertion of the probe into the facial aspect of the sulcus through the gingival margin, the simple visual method is based on the transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin while probing the buccal sulcus at the midfacial aspect of the tooth.
When the outline of the underlying periodontal probe can be seen through the gingival, the gingival phenotype is considered thin.
|
The biotype of gingival was determined by periodontal probe.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Papilla height
Time Frame: Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
Presence/absence of papilla height was assessed visually according to the papilla index proposed by Jemt
|
Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
|
Modified Plaque Index (mPI)
Time Frame: Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
plaque accumulation around the marginal peri-implant tissue was assessed by the criteria of mPI
|
Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
|
Modified Sulcus Bleeding Index (mBI)
Time Frame: Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
the bleeding tendency of the marginal peri-implant tissue was evaluated using mBI
|
Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
|
Probing Depth (PD, mm)
Time Frame: Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
PD was assessed at the mid-buccal, mid-oral, mesial and distal aspects of the buccal surfaces of each implant with a standard periodontal probe, and final value was determined by the average of four aspects.
|
Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
|
Gingival margin level (GML)
Time Frame: Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
gingival margin level was assessed by calculating the vertical distance between the most apical point of gingival margin at the buccal aspect of the crown and line connecting the peak of the adjacent mesial and distal natural teeth (PMD)
|
Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
|
The landmarks of first bone-implant contact (fBIC) and implant shoulder (IS)
Time Frame: Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
fBIC-IS was defined as the vertical distance the first bone-implant contact to implant shoulder, and the distance was assessed at the mesial and distal aspect of implant, respectively.
When the marginal crestal bone was located coronal to the IS, a positive (+) value was given, where a negative (-) value when located apically to the IS, the value was deemed as zero when IS and fBIC coincided.
The crestal bone level at the time of impression taking was regarded as baseline.
The known implant length was used for the calibration of dimensional distortion in the radiograph (the length of implant was 10 mm).
|
Between June 2019 and June 2021
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Xiaohui Zheng, MD, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, China
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- 1. Du H, Gao M, Qi C, Liu S, Lin Y. Drug-induced gingival hyperplasia and scaffolds: they may be valuable for horizontal food impaction. Med Hypotheses 2010;74(6): 984-5. 2. Bidra AS. Nonsurgical management of inflammatory periimplant disease caused by food impaction: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2014;111(2): 96-100. 3. Berglundh T, Lindhe J, Ericsson I, Mainello CP, Lijenberg B. The soft tissue barrier at implants and teeth. Clin Oral Implants Res 1991; 2: 81-90. 4. Berglundh T, Lindhe J, Jonsson K, Ericsson I. The topography of the vascular systems in the periodontal and peri-implant tissues in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 1994; 21: 189-93. 5. Chow YC, Wang HL. Factors and techniques influencing peri-implant papillae. Implant Dent 2010; 19(3): 208-19. 6. Sanavi F, Weisgold AS, Rose LF. Biologic width and its relation to periodontal biotypes. J Esthet Dent 1998; 10(3): 157-63. 7. De Rouck T, Eghbali R, Collys K, De Bruyn H, Cosyn J. The gingival biotype revisited: transparency of the periodontal probe through the gingival margin as a method to discriminate thin from thick gingiva. J Clin Periodontol 2009; 36(5): 428-33. 8. Olsson M, Lindhe J. Periodontal characteristics in individuals with varying form of the upper central incisors. J Clin Periodontol 1991; 18(1): 78-82. 9. Pontoriero R, Carnevale G. Surgical crown lengthening: a 12-month clinical wound healing study. J Periodontol 2001;72(7): 841-8. 10. Ronay V, Sahrmann P, Bindl A, Attin T, Schmidlin PR. Current status and perspectives of mucogingival soft tissue measurement methods. J Esthet Restor Dent 2011; 23(3):146-56. 11. Mombelli A, van Oosten MA, Schurch E Jr, Land NP. The microbiota associated with successful or failing osseointegrated titanium implants. Oral Microbiol Immunol 1987; 2(4):145-51. 12. Chang M, Wenstrom JL, Odman P, Andersson B. Implant supported single-tooth replacements compared to contralateral natural teeth. Crown and soft tissue dimensions. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999; 10(3): 185-94. 13. Welander M, Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T. The mucosal barrier at implant abutments of different materials. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19(7): 635-41. 14. Kajiwara N, Masaki C, Mukaibo T, Kondo Y, Nakamoto T, Hosokawa R. Soft tissue biological response to zirconia and metal implant abutments compared with natural tooth: microcirculation monitoring as a novel bioindicator. Implant Dent 2015; 24(1): 37-41. 15. Muller HP, Heinecke A, Schaller N, Eger T. Masticatory mucosa in subjects with different periodontal phenotypes. J Clin Periodontol 2000; 27(9):621-6. 16. Pradeep AR, Karthikeyan BV. Peri-implant papilla reconstruction: realities and limitations. J Periodontol, 2006. 77(3): p. 534-44. 17. Kan JY, Rungcharassaeng K, Umezu K, Kois JC. Dimensions of peri-implant mucosa: an evaluation of maxillary anterior single implants in humans. J Periodontol 2003;74(4):557-62. 18. Finelle G, Papadimitriou DE, Souza AB, Katebi N, Gallucci GO, Araujo MG. Peri-implant soft tissue and marginal bone adaptation on implant with non-matching healing abutments: micro-CT analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2015; 26(4): e42-6. 19. Farronato D, Santoro G, Canullo L, Botticelli D, Maiorana C, Lang NP. Establishment of the epithelial attachment and connective tissue adaptation to implants installed under the concept of
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (ACTUAL)
Study Start
Primary Completion (ACTUAL)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (ACTUAL)
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
- 2019021
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.