Randomized Clinical Study Comparing Two Guided Surgery Techniques for Free-end Implant Placement
Randomized Clinical Study Comparing Two Guided Surgery Techniques for Free-end Implant Placement: A Multicenter Study
This is a randomized multicenter clinical study that compares two static guided surgery techniques in free-end partial edentulism.
The aim is to compare the accuracy obtained between dento-osseous supported and dento-mucosal supported surgical splints to place dental implants in posterior osseous ridges.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Guillem Esteve-Pardo, PhD
- Phone Number: +34 965215755
- Email: guillem@clinicaesteve.es
Study Locations
-
-
-
Alicante, Spain, 03001
- Recruiting
- Clínica Dental esteve
-
Contact:
- Guillem Esteve-Pardo, PhD
- Phone Number: +34 965215755
- Email: guillem@clinicaesteve.es
-
Sub-Investigator:
- Guillem Esteve-Pardo, PhD
-
-
Murcia
-
Cabezo De Torres, Murcia, Spain, 30110
- Recruiting
- Clínica Dental Sánchez Nicolás
-
Contact:
- Jose Antonio Sánchez-Nicolás, DDS
- Phone Number: +34 968907578
- Email: josedentistacabezo@hotmail.com
-
Principal Investigator:
- Jose Antonio Sánchez-Nicolás, DDS
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients who present to one of the two participating clinics with a posterior edentulous area starting from the second premolar.
- Patients in whom the placement of dental implants is not contraindicated.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients with hypersensitivities or allergies that contraindicate the intervention.
- Presence of orofacial neurological symptoms.
- Patients treated with bisphosphonates.
- Pregnant or breastfeeding women, or women undergoing contraceptive treatment.
- Signs of infection in the surgical area.
- Need for unconventional surgical procedures (e.g., split crest, vertical regeneration, block graft).
- Lack of patient cooperation.
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 |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: Tooth supported guide
Patients who will receive implant placement using a tooth supported surgical guide.
|
Placement of two dental implants in the jaw.
|
|
Experimental: Bone and tooth supported guide
Patients who will receive implant placement using a bone and tooth supported surgical guide.
|
Placement of two dental implants in the jaw.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Three-dimensional implant position deviations (measured by intraoral scan and planning software)
Time Frame: From enrollment to the end of surgery
|
Three-dimensional deviations between the planned implant position and the actual postoperative implant position will be assessed.
The deviations will be measured using an intraoral scanner (Medit i700®) and planning software (BlueSky Plan®).
Units of measure: horizontal and vertical linear deviation (in millimeters), global deviation (in millimeters), and angular deviation (in degrees), evaluated at both implant entry and apex points.
|
From enrollment to the end of surgery
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Three-dimensional implant position deviations (measured by CBCT and planning software)
Time Frame: From enrollment to the end of surgery
|
Three-dimensional deviations between the planned implant position and the actual postoperative implant position will be assessed.
The deviations will be measured using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and planning software (BlueSky Plan®).
Units of measure: horizontal and vertical linear deviation (in millimeters), global deviation (in millimeters), and angular deviation (in degrees), evaluated at both implant entry and apex points.
|
From enrollment to the end of surgery
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Bover-Ramos F, Vina-Almunia J, Cervera-Ballester J, Penarrocha-Diago M, Garcia-Mira B. Accuracy of Implant Placement with Computer-Guided Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Cadaver, Clinical, and In Vitro Studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018 January/February;33(1):101-115. doi: 10.11607/jomi.5556. Epub 2017 Jun 20.
- Lin CC, Ishikawa M, Maida T, Cheng HC, Ou KL, Nezu T, Endo K. Stereolithographic Surgical Guide with a Combination of Tooth and Bone Support: Accuracy of Guided Implant Surgery in Distal Extension Situation. J Clin Med. 2020 Mar 5;9(3):709. doi: 10.3390/jcm9030709.
- Younes F, Cosyn J, De Bruyckere T, Cleymaet R, Bouckaert E, Eghbali A. A randomized controlled study on the accuracy of free-handed, pilot-drill guided and fully guided implant surgery in partially edentulous patients. J Clin Periodontol. 2018 Jun;45(6):721-732. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12897. Epub 2018 May 10.
- Kessler A, Le V, Folwaczny M. Influence of the tooth position, guided sleeve height, supporting length, manufacturing methods, and resin E-modulus on the in vitro accuracy of surgical implant guides in a free-end situation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Sep;32(9):1097-1104. doi: 10.1111/clr.13804. Epub 2021 Jul 17.
- Liu R, Xia R, Zhang L, Gan X, Li C, Liu Q, Chen Z, Chen Z. The influence of guide stabilizers and their application sequences on trueness and precision of surgical guides in free end situations: An in vitro analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024 Mar;35(3):294-304. doi: 10.1111/clr.14226. Epub 2023 Dec 19.
- Shi Y, Wang J, Ma C, Shen J, Dong X, Lin D. A systematic review of the accuracy of digital surgical guides for dental implantation. Int J Implant Dent. 2023 Oct 25;9(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s40729-023-00507-w.
- Cho JY, Kim SB, Ryu J. The accuracy of a partially guided system using an in-office 3D-printed surgical guide for implant placement. Int J Comput Dent. 2021 Feb 26;24(1):19-27.
- Raico Gallardo YN, da Silva-Olivio IRT, Mukai E, Morimoto S, Sesma N, Cordaro L. Accuracy comparison of guided surgery for dental implants according to the tissue of support: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 May;28(5):602-612. doi: 10.1111/clr.12841. Epub 2016 Apr 8.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
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
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- GUIDED
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
product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.
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.