Influence of Z Shaped and Conventional Sulcular Incisions on Healing and Interproximal Bone Loss in Implant Surgery

Influence of Z Shaped Incisions on Healing and Interproximal Bone Loss in Comparison With Conventional Sulcular Incisions (H Shaped) in Implant Surgery Under Magnification: A Randomized Clinical Trial

The present study is a human, prospective, parallel, randomised controlled clinical trial conducted to check the interproximal bone loss of Z shaped incision over conventional sulcular H shaped incision.The trial is in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) criteria, 2010.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Twenty healthy individuals satisfying the inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited for the study. A detailed, thorough medical and dental history was obtained and each patient was subjected to comprehensive clinical and radiological examination. All patients were informed about the nature of the study, the surgical procedure involved, potential benefits and risks associated with the surgical procedure and written informed consent were obtained from all patients. In the test group patients Z shaped incision was done to place implants and H shaped sulcular incision was placed in control group.

The clinical and radiographic parameters were recorded at baseline,24 hours,7days, three months and six months postoperatively.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

20

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Karnataka
      • Bangalore, Karnataka, India, 562157
        • Krishnadevaraya college of dental sciences

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients with single or multiple edentulous spaces in the maxillary and mandibular arches having Siebert's Class 1 and 2 ridge defects.
  2. Patients willing to participate in the study.
  3. Patients above 18 years of age.
  4. Patients exhibiting keratinized tissue width more than or equal to 2 mm.
  5. Systemically healthy patients.
  6. Patients who demonstrate full mouth plaque control and bleeding scores<25% and showing good compliance.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients who do not give consent.
  2. Untreated periodontal disease, caries.
  3. Insufficient oral hygiene.
  4. Smokers.
  5. Previous radiation therapy.
  6. Patients with known systemic diseases and conditions
  7. Pregnant and lactating women.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Test group
Two horizontal incisions placed 1-2 mm away from the papilla of the teeth adjacent to the edentulous space following the mesial and distal contour of the teeth. These two horizontal incisions are then connected by an oblique incision from the disto-buccal to mesio lingual point angles.

After local anaesthesia, a mucoperiosteal flap will be elevated at the edentulous ridge with two horizontal incisions placed with a no MB 69 blade, 1-2 mm away from the papilla of the teeth adjacent to the edentulous space following the mesial and distal contour of the teeth. The extend of the incisions should be up to the proximal line angles of the adjacent teeth. These two horizontal incisions are then connected by an oblique incision from the disto-buccal to mesio lingual point angles. A periosteal elevator is used to elevate a full thickness mucoperiosteal flap buccally and lingually to the level of the mucogingival junction, exposing the alveolar ridge of the implant surgical sites.

Endosseous implant placement is done followed by simple interrupted resorbable sutures

Experimental: Control group
Sulcular incisions placed in the proximal sides of the adjacent tooth facing the edentulous space in a bucco lingual direction extending between the proximal line angles Mid crestal incision performed in the attached mucosa of the edentulous area connecting the sulcular incisions of the adjacent teeth from the distal to mesial tooth

After local anaesthesia, a mucoperiosteal flap is elelevated by placing sulcular incisions placed in the proximal sides of the adjacent tooth facing the edentulous space in a bucco lingual direction extending between the proximal line angles using a MB 69 blade.

Mid crestal incision performed in the attached mucosa of the edentulous area connecting the sulcular incisions of the adjacent teeth from the distal to mesial tooth. A full thickness mucoperiosteal flap will be elevated buccally and lingually to the level of the mucogingival junction to expose the alveolar ridge of the implant surgical sites using a periosteal elevator.

Endosseous implant will be placed, followed by simple interrupted resorbable sutures.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Inter proximal bone level
Time Frame: 6 months
Mesial and distal peri-implant radiographic bone level will be recorded in millimetres on the digital radiographs with grid at baseline and follow up
6 months
Healing
Time Frame: 7 days
Early wound healing index is assessed. values 1-5 is present. Increase in score depicts worse healing.
7 days

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Visual Analouge Score
Time Frame: 7 days
a questionnaire will be given to the patients in which their responses for Visual Analog Score that ranges from 1-10 values and highest values indicate the worst outcome, variation in feeding habits, analgesics dosage is recorded.
7 days
Clinical attachment level
Time Frame: 3 months
The amount of attached gingiva was measured by subtracting the probing depth from the amount of keratinised mucosa
3 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Dr Shobith S Mampuzha, MDS, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences
  • Principal Investigator: Dr Prabhuji MLV, MDS, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

November 20, 2018

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 31, 2020

Study Completion (Anticipated)

January 1, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 10, 2019

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 10, 2019

First Posted (Actual)

December 12, 2019

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

January 5, 2021

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 1, 2021

Last Verified

January 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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.

Clinical Trials on Bone Loss

Clinical Trials on Z shaped incision

3
Subscribe