- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT04230837
Marginal Bone Level Around Implants With Definitive Abutments
Marginal Bone Levels Around Implants With Definitive Abutments Of One and Three Millimeters: A One Year Of Follow Up Randomized Clinical Trial
Study Overview
Status
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the peri-implant crestal bone level around implants placed 1.5 mm subcrestally with PS and a 1 mm or 3 mm definitive AH at the time of implant placement after 1 year.
Study design
This randomized controlled prospective study was carried out after its acceptance by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee with code number PER-ECL-2015-05, at the Faculty of Dentistry of the Universitat Internacional de Catalunya (UIC-Barcelona).
Study population and selection criteria
Patients were selected from the Department of Periodontology at Universitat Internacional de Catalunya. Once signed the informed consent, patients were screened following inclusion criteria.
Randomization
The randomization between the groups (Group A/Group B) was performed using OxMaR system (Oxford Minimization and Randomization) to determine the use of a 1 mm (Group A) or 3 mm (Group B) height abutments. The surgeon was unaware of the abutment height until after the insertion of the implant.
Surgical and prosthetic treatment protocol Dental implants were placed by second and third year students of the Postgraduate Program in Periodontology at UIC-Barcelona, supervised by two experienced professors (MM, MA). Vega® implant, Klockner, several lengths (8, 10, 12 mm) and diameters (3.5, 4.0, 4.5 mm) were used depending on bone availability. The rehabilitation was carried out by students of the Postgraduate program of Esthetic and Prosthetic Dentistry at UIC-Barcelona, using the permanent prosthetic abutments with two different heights (1 or 3 mm) placed the day of surgery. The screwed-retained rehabilitations to the Permanent® abutment were single crowns or partial restorations (maximum of 3 crowns), both performed with CAD-CAM technology. Temporary restorations were placed between 2 to 4 months after surgery, for 4 weeks, before the placement of the definitive ones.
Treatment sequence:
- Preparation and implant surgery: a radiologic guide on a CBCT scan, and a standardized periapical radiograph were made for every patient. Pre-surgical instructions and medication such as antibiotic prophylaxis was made with 500 mg Amoxicillin every 8 h starting 1 hour prior to surgery, and 500mg/8h for 7 days. In allergic patients, Clindamycin 300 mg every 8 h, starting 1 day previously was used, and 300mg/8h/7days. The KM thickness was assessed before raising the mucoperiosteal flap. The placement of the implant was done following the manufacturing protocol and using a surgical guide according to the radiological guide previously used. IAll implants were placed 1.5 mm subcrestally from the most apical area of the crest, using a periodontal probe. At this time, the Permanent® abutment of 1 or 3 mm was chosen randomly and was placed at 35 Ncm. Postoperative anti-inflammatory medication (ibuprofen 600 mg, 1 tablet / 8 h / if pain) and 0.12% chlorhexidine rinse (2 times / day / 7 days) were advised. A standardized periapical radiograph was performed immediately after the implant placement. The amount of Keratinized gingiva (KG) was recorded and also the stability values of the implant by using the Penguin® device (RFA values) to the implant and on the Permanent abutment.
- Prosthetic treatment: After 10 weeks up to 4 months, impressions were taken with fluid and heavy silicone (Zhermack® elite HD +) to make the provisional prosthesis, as long as the RFA values were greater than 65 ISQ. At the time of the temporary resin prosthesis placement, all the following clinical parameters (PD, mPI, mSBI, KG, BG, S, POI) were recorded and a periapical radiograph also taken. The definitive prosthesis was performed 4 weeks after the placement of the provisional. Records of clinical measures (BG, MT, mPII, mSBI, PD, KM) and periapical X-ray (periapical). clinical follow-up (MT, mPII, mSBI, PD), radiographic (periapical and orthopantomography) and RFA were evaluated 12 months later.
- Radiographic evaluation X-rays were taken at the time of implant placement, 8-12 weeks after placement, after screwing the provisional rehabilitation and at 12 months. Radiographs were standardized by using an individualized radiographic stent for each patient, thus ensuring a parallel technique. (Figure 1 and 2) MBL measurements were performed by one examiner who recorded on each radiograph mesially and distally, the most coronal part of the bone crest (C), the position of the implant shoulder (H), and the level of the first peri-implant bone contact with the implant (Fi ) or abutment (Fa). Then, the examiner measured the distance in millimeters of H-C, which defined the crestal marginal bone level (MBLc), while the shoulder distance of Fi was the marginal bone level of the implant (MBLi). When the first contact was located in the abutment, the distance H and Fa was recorded as the marginal bone level of the abutment (MBLa). The distance MBLc was considered positive if the mark C was coronal to H, negative if C was apical, and zero if Fi and H coincided (Figure 3). The changes in MBLc (CMBLc) were registered at 12 months with respect to the baseline. Changes in MBLc, MBLi or MBLa (CMBLc, CMBLi, CMBLa) were measured in the same time period at 12 months.
- Calibration The examiner, independent to the study, carried out the radiographic analysis using the Image J software (Java image processing program by Wayne Rasband; National Institutes of Health (NIH), USA) on periapical radiographs, with a x7 magnification. Previously, the examiner was calibrated 3 times separately, with an interval of 72 hours, making measurements at 10 radiographs to determine the intraoperator reproducibility. The aim was to obtain an intraclass coefficient of 0.99 (P <.05) as the intraoperator reliability coefficient.
- Stability evaluation The resonance frequency analysis, RFA was recorded with the Penguin® system (Integration Diagnostics Sweden) at the time of implant placement, 10-12weeks and 1year.
- Sample size Accepting an alpha risk of 0.05 and a beta risk of less than 0.2 in a bilateral contrast, 28 subjects were required in each group to detect a difference equal to or greater than 0.5mm. It was assumed that the standard deviation (SD) was 0.59 and a possible drop-out of 20% was estimated.
- Statistical analysis Analysis was performed at implant level. In order to describe the qualitative variables, absolute frequencies and percentages were used. The description of quantitative variables was performed using the mean and SD. Normal distribution of each parameter was assessed by the Shapiro-Wilk test, and as data did not follow a normal distribution a Wilcoxon test was used to compare interproximal MBLs between baseline and 12 months follow-up, and Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare interproximal MBL changes between treatment groups. The level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. The statistical package SPSS 22.0 (IBM, SPSS, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used for the statistical analysis.
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Barcelona, Spain, 08195
- Universitat Internacional de Catalunya
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Male or female ≥18 years old;
- Controlled ASA1 or ASA2 patient;
- Healthy periodontium or with controlled periodontal disease;
- Need for rehabilitation with implants in partially posterior edentulous sextants;
- Full Mouth Plaque Score (FMPS) less than 20% at the time of surgery;
Collaborating patients.
- According to the implant location:
- Healed posterior sites, with a minimum of 2 months post-extraction;
- Ridge width of 7 mm or more and of 10 mm of height to the mandibular nerve and 8 mm to the maxillary sinus;
- Minimum keratinized mucosa (KM) width of 4 mm;
- Antagonist dentition having a fixed restoration or natural teeth, (5) restorative space greater than 5 mm.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients with endocrine, immunological or metabolic alterations;
- Pregnancy, allergy to any metallic component of the implant;
- Drug consumption or alcoholism;
- Tobacco ≥10 cig/d and
Severe bruxism and TMJ pathology.
- According to the implant location:
- Require regeneration techniques;
- Width of KM less than 2 mm at any implant site;
- Infections in the treatment area;
- Absence of implant primary stability and
- Being unable to perform prosthetically guided screw-retained restorations.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: A: Abutments of 1 mm
Definitive abutments of 1 mm height were located.
|
The placement of the implant was done following the manufacturing protocol and using a surgical guide according to the radiological guide previously used.
At this time, the Permanent® abutment of 1 or 3 mm was chosen randomly and was placed at 35 Ncm.
|
|
Experimental: B: Abutments of 3 mm
Definitive abutments of 3 mm height were located.
|
The placement of the implant was done following the manufacturing protocol and using a surgical guide according to the radiological guide previously used.
At this time, the Permanent® abutment of 1 or 3 mm was chosen randomly and was placed at 35 Ncm.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change from Baseline Bone Loss, at 8-12 weeks and 1 year.
Time Frame: baseline, 8-12 weeks and 1 year
|
X-rays were taken at the time of implant placement, 8-12 weeks after placement, after screwing the provisional rehabilitation and at 12 months.
|
baseline, 8-12 weeks and 1 year
|
|
Mucosal thickness (MT)
Time Frame: baseline
|
Mucosal thickness (MT) before placement of the implant using a PCP-UNC15 periodontal probe.
This measure will be compared with the abutment high and bone loss at 1 year.
|
baseline
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Change from Baseline the resonance frequency analysis at 8-12 weeks and 1 year.
Time Frame: baseline, 8-12 weeks and 1 year
|
RFA was recorded with the Penguin® system at the time of implant placement, 8-12weeks and 1 year later.
|
baseline, 8-12 weeks and 1 year
|
|
Plaque index at 1 year
Time Frame: 1 year
|
Plaque index (mPII, modified plate index, Mombelli et al., 1987)
|
1 year
|
|
Bleeding on probing at 1 year
Time Frame: 1 year
|
Presence of bleeding on probing (mSBI, Modified bleeding index, Mombelli et al., 1987)
|
1 year
|
|
Probing depth at 1 year
Time Frame: 1 year
|
Probing depth (PD) (6 locations MV / V / DV / MP / P / DP): with a periodontal probe PCP-UNC15;
|
1 year
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Investigators
- Study Director: Jose Nart, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Spinato S, Stacchi C, Lombardi T, Bernardello F, Messina M, Zaffe D. Biological width establishment around dental implants is influenced by abutment height irrespective of vertical mucosal thickness: A cluster randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Jul;30(7):649-659. doi: 10.1111/clr.13450. Epub 2019 May 12.
- Molina A, Sanz-Sanchez I, Martin C, Blanco J, Sanz M. The effect of one-time abutment placement on interproximal bone levels and peri-implant soft tissues: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Apr;28(4):443-452. doi: 10.1111/clr.12818. Epub 2016 Mar 25.
- Blanco J, Pico A, Caneiro L, Novoa L, Batalla P, Martin-Lancharro P. Effect of abutment height on interproximal implant bone level in the early healing: A randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Jan;29(1):108-117. doi: 10.1111/clr.13108. Epub 2017 Dec 8. Erratum In: Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020 Oct;31(10):1037.
- Novoa L, Batalla P, Caneiro L, Pico A, Linares A, Blanco J. Influence of Abutment Height on Maintenance of Peri-implant Crestal Bone at Bone-Level Implants: A 3-Year Follow-up Study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2017 Sep/Oct;37(5):721-727. doi: 10.11607/prd.2762.
- Linkevicius T, Apse P, Grybauskas S, Puisys A. Reaction of crestal bone around implants depending on mucosal tissue thickness. A 1-year prospective clinical study. Stomatologija. 2009;11(3):83-91.
- Puisys A, Linkevicius T. The influence of mucosal tissue thickening on crestal bone stability around bone-level implants. A prospective controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Feb;26(2):123-9. doi: 10.1111/clr.12301. Epub 2013 Dec 9.
- Borges T, Leitao B, Pereira M, Carvalho A, Galindo-Moreno P. Influence of the abutment height and connection timing in early peri-implant marginal bone changes: A prospective randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Sep;29(9):907-914. doi: 10.1111/clr.13343.
- Chen Z, Lin CY, Li J, Wang HL, Yu H. Influence of abutment height on peri-implant marginal bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2019 Jul;122(1):14-21.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.10.003. Epub 2019 Feb 16.
- Galindo-Moreno P, Leon-Cano A, Ortega-Oller I, Monje A, Suarez F, OValle F, Spinato S, Catena A. Prosthetic Abutment Height is a Key Factor in Peri-implant Marginal Bone Loss. J Dent Res. 2014 Jul;93(7 Suppl):80S-85S. doi: 10.1177/0022034513519800. Epub 2014 Mar 12.
- Linkevicius T, Puisys A, Steigmann M, Vindasiute E, Linkeviciene L. Influence of Vertical Soft Tissue Thickness on Crestal Bone Changes Around Implants with Platform Switching: A Comparative Clinical Study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Dec;17(6):1228-36. doi: 10.1111/cid.12222. Epub 2014 Mar 28.
- Vervaeke S, Dierens M, Besseler J, De Bruyn H. The influence of initial soft tissue thickness on peri-implant bone remodeling. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014 Apr;16(2):238-47. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2012.00474.x. Epub 2012 Jul 3.
- Canullo L, Camacho-Alonso F, Tallarico M, Meloni SM, Xhanari E, Penarrocha-Oltra D. Mucosa Thickness and Peri-implant Crestal Bone Stability: A Clinical and Histologic Prospective Cohort Trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017 May/June;32(5):675-681. doi: 10.11607/jomi.5349. Epub 2017 Mar 15.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Actual)
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
- PER-ECL-2015-05
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.
Clinical Trials on Implant Site Reaction
-
National Research Centre, EgyptCompletedImplant Complication | Implant Site ReactionEgypt
-
Cairo UniversityNot yet recruitingDental Implant Failed | Implant Site Reaction
-
Universidad Complutense de MadridRecruiting
-
University of CagliariRecruiting
-
Mahidol UniversityRecruiting
-
The Dental Hospital of Zhejiang University School...RecruitingImplant Site ReactionChina
-
Mohamed Reda Mohamed AbdelhadyCompletedImplant Site ReactionEgypt
-
October University for Modern Sciences and ArtsCompletedImplant Site ReactionEgypt
-
Cairo UniversityCompleted
-
National Research Centre, EgyptCompleted
Clinical Trials on Inmediate abutment height
-
Cairo UniversityUnknown
-
University of ValenciaUniversity of Santiago de CompostelaActive, not recruitingPeri-implant Tissue Healing Assessed by Proteomic AnalysisSpain
-
University of Illinois at ChicagoBioHorizons, Inc.Active, not recruitingDental Implant Failure NosUnited States
-
Lee KirbyCompletedHemiplegia | WheelchairsCanada
-
Medical University of GrazActive, not recruitingPeri-implant Soft Tissue HealingAustria
-
University of Santiago de CompostelaGalimplant Dental ImplantsCompletedDental Implant Failed | Dental Prosthesis FailureSpain
-
University of Santiago de CompostelaUniversidad de Murcia; University of Valencia; University of Salamanca; Health...Active, not recruitingDental Implant | Tooth Extraction | Tooth-loss | Teeth AbsentSpain
-
Cairo UniversityCompleted
-
Damascus UniversityCompletedMissing TeethSyrian Arab Republic
-
University of BernCompletedFailure of Dental Prosthesis