Clinical Evaluation of Two Different Attachment System (ADLCvsLOC)

June 23, 2022 updated by: University of Zurich

Evaluation of Patient Reported Outcome Measures and Clinical Performance of Implant Supported Overdentures With Two Different Attachment Systems: A Randomized Cross Over Clinical Study

Edentulous patients commonly experience a deterioration in the quality of life; both in terms of oral and general health. Studies demonstrated that conventional dentures do not adequately restore masticatory function nor quality of life. In contrast, implant-supported overdentures are considered the standard of care for edentulous patients as they offer a more stable prosthesis that ultimately results in improved oral function and patient satisfaction.

Precision attachments such as studs, magnets, telescopic crowns or a bars are commonly used for implant supported overdentures. Implant overdentures supported by stud attachments gained popularity for the rehabilitation of edentulous patients as they are self-aligning, offer dual retention and compensate for divergence between implants up to angles of 40 degrees.

However, it has been documented that the stud attachment system (Locators) requires a high frequency of maintenance, particularly with regard to the replacement of the matrix.

In order to overcome some of these limitations of existing attachment systems, a newer system was developed consisting of a matrix made of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) instead of a polymeric material. This system has an amorphous diamond like carbon-based abutment coating (ADLC) and it was claimed to be more resistant to wear.

Clinically and in vitro, no comparative studies have been performed addressing wear and retention of the traditional stud attachment and the newer ADLC attachment.

Thus, the aim of the present study is to clinically and in vitro evaluate the ADLC and study attachment system.

Study Overview

Status

Enrolling by invitation

Conditions

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

26

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

      • Pune, India, 411001
        • M.A.Rangoonwala College of Dental Sciences & Research Center

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

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Fully edentulous patients encountering problems (functional, aesthetics) with existing dentures in the upper and lower jaw or patients seeking for implant-supported prostheses
  • Adequate bone in the anterior mandible for the placement of implants (Regular diameter implant with a minimal length of 10mm) in the canine region
  • Written informed consent
  • Ability to understand the procedure and to answer a questionnaire.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Impaired cognitive function and/or manual dexterity
  • Inability to follow the procedures of the study, e.g. due to language problems, psychological disorders, dementia, etc. of the participant
  • Unable to attend follow-up examinations
  • Known or suspected non-compliance, drug or alcohol abuse
  • Presence of any uncontrolled systematic disease that could compromise implant surgery and implant long-term performance
  • History of radiotherapy in the head and neck region
  • Heavy smoker (>10 cig. /day
  • Any potential allergies or hypersensitivity to chemical ingredients of material used

    • Bruxism
    • Presence of bone metabolic disorders (e.g. osteoporosis)
    • Pregnant or 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: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: ADLC attachment in first phase
Each patient will receive 2 implants in the canine region. Three months later, each patient will be randomized and half of the patients will receive first the ADLC (test) device (first phase). In the second phase of the crossover trial (6 months after the start of the first phase), the attachments will be replaced. Patients previously allocated to the ADLC group will receive the LOC attachments.

Each patient will receive 2 implants in the canine region using a guided-surgery protocol and a pre-prepared surgical stent. A healing abutment of an adequate size will be placed on the implant for transmucosal healing. The flaps will be subsequently sutured around the healing abutments. Patients' existing prostheses will be adjusted. Suture removal will be performed one week post implant placement.

Three months later, implant level impressions will be made using the open tray technique. Each patient will be then be randomized using eCRF (electronic Case Report Form) to either ADLC group or LOC group. A final cast of the patients will be obtained and the attachments will be installed using an in-direct technique by a calibrated prosthodontists.

Other Names:
  • NOVALOC
Active Comparator: LOC attachment in first phase
Each patient will receive 2 implants in the canine region. Three months later, each patient will be randomized and half of the patients will receive first the LOC (control) device (first phase). In the second phase of the crossover trial (6 months after the start of the first phase), the attachments will be replaced. Patients previously allocated to the LOC group will receive the ADLC attachments.

Each patient will receive 2 implants in the canine region using a guided-surgery protocol and a pre-prepared surgical stent. A healing abutment of an adequate size will be placed on the implant for transmucosal healing. The flaps will be subsequently sutured around the healing abutments. Patients' existing prostheses will be adjusted. Suture removal will be performed one week post implant placement.

Three months later, implant level impressions will be made using the open tray technique. Each patient will be then be randomized using eCRF (electronic Case Report Form) to either ADLC group or LOC group. A final cast of the patients will be obtained and the attachments will be installed using an in-direct technique by a calibrated prosthodontists.

Other Names:
  • NOVALOC

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Patient reported outcome measure
Time Frame: After a functional period of 6 months
Mean VAS scores (visual analogue scale (0-100)) related to patient overall satisfaction for the ADLC and the LOC (Locator) attachment system provided by the patients
After a functional period of 6 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs): VAS
Time Frame: 6 months, 1, 3, 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
VAS scores (visual analogue scale (0-100)) based questionnaires about retention, stability of the prosthesis, maintenance of oral hygiene, ability to speak, comfort and aesthetics will be evaluated at screening
6 months, 1, 3, 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs): OHIP-14
Time Frame: 6 months, 1, 3, 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
OHIP-14 (Oral Health Impact Profile) will be evaluated at screening (Questionnaire)
6 months, 1, 3, 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs): Costs
Time Frame: 6 months, 1, 3, 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Costs (INR) related to the entire treatment including additional appointments scheduled for repair and/or replacement of prostheses/matrix/matrix components
6 months, 1, 3, 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Technical outcomes:
Time Frame: 6 months after the first and the second evaluation period, respectively
Questionnaire (Wear of the polymeric and PEEK inserts, Deterioration of the PEEK and polymeric inserts, Initial and final retention of the two attachment systems)
6 months after the first and the second evaluation period, respectively
Clinical outcomes: PCR
Time Frame: after a functional period of 6 months for each attachment system; and1, 3 and 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Plaque control record (PCR) (Questionnaire: 0/1)
after a functional period of 6 months for each attachment system; and1, 3 and 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Clinical outcomes: BOP
Time Frame: after a functional period of 6 months for each attachment system; and1, 3 and 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Bleeding on probing (BOP) (Questionnaire: 0/1)
after a functional period of 6 months for each attachment system; and1, 3 and 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Clinical outcomes: PD
Time Frame: after a functional period of 6 months for each attachment system; and1, 3 and 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems
Probing depth (PD) (mm)
after a functional period of 6 months for each attachment system; and1, 3 and 5 years after the evaluation period of the second attachment systems

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Mohit Kheur, Prof., M.A.Rangoonwala College of Dental Sciences & Research Center

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 2, 2020

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

December 1, 2022

Study Completion (Anticipated)

January 1, 2028

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

August 26, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 3, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

September 10, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

June 24, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 23, 2022

Last Verified

June 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • MCES/EC/613/2020

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

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 Dental Implant

Clinical Trials on ADLC attachment system with PEEK inserts

3
Subscribe