The Influence of Vertical Implant Position on the Marginal Bone Loss in Thick Versus Thin Phenotype.

December 11, 2023 updated by: Nesma Mohamed Fouad Shemais, Cairo University

The Influence of Vertical Implant Position With Immediate Provisionalization on the Marginal Bone Loss in Thick Versus Thin Phenotype. A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

Multiple clinical studies have established high survival rates and tremendous predictability of dental implant treatment (Schiegnitz and Al-Nawas 2018). However, a pleasant esthetic outcome is the patient's primary expectation regarding implants in the esthetic zone (Vermylen et al. 2003)and several esthetic factors have been evaluated to contribute to an esthetic appearance. Among these, the midfacial soft tissue level is considered to be one of the most important factors; Cosyn and co-workers reported that among factors including soft tissue phenotype, the midfacial recession was associated with the position of the implant (Cosyn et al. 2012).

Therefore, subcrestal implant placement has been advocated as it has been associated with the reduction of crestal bone loss in cases with decreased soft tissue thickness. If the vertical soft tissues on the crest of the alveolar ridge are 2 mm or less at the time of implant placement, implants will undergo unavoidable bone resorption by establishing sufficient biologic protection. Another option was proposed by Linkevicius et al, who introduced the subcrestal implant placement as a method to accommodate the problem of thin soft tissues.(Linkevicius et al. 2020).

Limiting the extent of peri-implant bone loss has been recognized for decades to be an important aspect of long-term implant success, and stable peri-implant bone conditions play an important role in maintaining esthetics (Laurell and Lundgren, 2011).

The opinion expressed widely in the scientific literature has been that subcrestal implant placement leads to increased crestal bone resorption. However, clinical studies addressing the implant placement depth in relation to crestal bone have been rare. Data on subcrestal versus crestal placement have mostly come from animal studies. Even fewer data are available regarding the effects of crestal versus subcrestal positioning of platform-switched implants (Cochran et al., 2009).

This study aims to compare the effect of different vertical implant position with immediate provisionalization on marginal bone loss thin and thick vertical tissue biotype.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

60

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

      • Giza, Egypt, 00000
        • Recruiting
        • Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University
        • Contact:

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

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Eligibility criteria:

Inclusion criteria:

  • Patients with single missing upper anterior or premolar teeth
  • Patients with minimum buccolingual width of 6 mm and mesiodistal width of 6mm
  • Patients with healthy systemic conditions.
  • Patients older than 18 years.
  • Good oral hygiene.
  • Accepts one year follow-up period (cooperative patients).
  • The patient provides informed consent.
  • Adequate Inter-arch space for implant placement.
  • Favorable occlusion (no traumatic occlusion).
  • Absence of allergy to the prescribed medications.

Exclusion criteria:

  • Patients with inadequate bone volume and/ or quality
  • Patients with local root remnants
  • Patients with inadequate wound healing
  • Patients with signs of acute infection related to the area of interest.
  • Patients with habits that may jeopardize the implant longevity and affect the results of the study such as parafunctional habits (Lobbezoo et al., 2006).
  • Heavy smokers patients (more than 10 cigarettes per day) (Lambert, Morris and Ochi, 2000).
  • Metabolic diseases such as diabetes or hyperthyroidism as well as systemic medications such as chemotherapy or bisphosphonates
  • Pregnant or nursing women.
  • Uncooperative patients.

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: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Thin vertical soft tissue biotype, Placement of BLX implants 2 mm sub-crestal
In Thin vertical soft tissue biotype, Placement of BLX implants 2 mm sub-crestal in single missing anterior or premolar teeth in the esthetic zone with immediate provisionalization via a straight emergence profile temporary crown on a temporary abutment.
Placement of BLX implants 2 mm sub-crestal in single missing anterior or premolar teeth in the esthetic zone with immediate provisionalization via a straight emergence profile temporary crown on a temporary abutment.
Active Comparator: Thin vertical soft tissue biotype, Placement of BLX implants equicrestal
In Thin vertical soft tissue biotype, Placement of BLX implants equicrestal in single missing anterior or premolar teeth in the esthetic zone with immediate provisionalization via a straight emergence profile temporary crown on a temporary abutment.
Placement of BLX implants equicrestal in single missing anterior or premolar teeth in the esthetic zone with immediate provisionalization via a straight emergence profile temporary crown on a temporary abutment.
Experimental: Thick vertical soft tissue biotype, Placement of BLX implants 2 mm sub-crestal
In Thick vertical soft tissue biotype, Placement of BLX implants 2 mm sub-crestal in single missing anterior or premolar teeth in the esthetic zone with immediate provisionalization via a straight emergence profile temporary crown on a temporary abutment.
Placement of BLX implants 2 mm sub-crestal in single missing anterior or premolar teeth in the esthetic zone with immediate provisionalization via a straight emergence profile temporary crown on a temporary abutment.
Active Comparator: Thick vertical soft tissue biotype, Placement of BLX implants equicrestal
In Thick vertical soft tissue biotype, Placement of BLX implants equicrestal in single missing anterior or premolar teeth in the esthetic zone with immediate provisionalization via a straight emergence profile temporary crown on a temporary abutment.
Placement of BLX implants equicrestal in single missing anterior or premolar teeth in the esthetic zone with immediate provisionalization via a straight emergence profile temporary crown on a temporary abutment.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Crestal bone loss
Time Frame: 1 year
Interproximal bone loss will be measured using paralleling cone technique with standardized peri-apical x-ray and bone loss will be measured mesial and distal to the implant by measuring the vertical bone loss from the initial implant position at T3 immediately after implant position and T4 (6 months) and T5 (12 months), ,where interproximal bone loss will be defined as the distance from implant shoulder to the mesial and distal first visible bone-implant contact (fBIC) and (b) bone over the implant platform. One independent and calibrated examiner (A.P.) measured these radiological variables to the nearest 0.1 mm (Pico et al., 2019).
1 year

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Radiographic horizontal bucco-palatal bone changes
Time Frame: 1 year
The bucco-palatal width of the alveolar bone will be measured perpendicular to the long axis of the alveolar bone; the 3 measurements will be the at 3 levels implant platform, 2mm and 4 mm . Each measurement will be recorded at different times (at day 0 after finishing the procedure and 12 months post-operatively) (Park et al. 2022).
1 year
Radiographic vertical bone changes
Time Frame: 1 year
Vertical bone height will be measured. Measurement will be taken at highest point of the remaining labial/buccal plate of bone using the implant neck as a reference point. Each measurement will be recorded at different times (at day 0 after finishing the procedure and 12 months post-operatively) and the difference between pre and post-operative measurements will be determined as the gain in labial/buccal vertical bone dimension (Wu et al. 2019
1 year
Midfacial recession (MFR):
Time Frame: easured at 6, and 12 months
Corono-apical distance between the peri-implant soft tissue margin and the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) of the homologous contralateral tooth. Midfacial recession will be (Zucchelli et al. 2019).
easured at 6, and 12 months
Esthetic evaluation
Time Frame: 1 year
(The pink esthetic score) 1-14 score
1 year
implant survival
Time Frame: 1 year
A binary outcome, the definition of implant success was based on the clinical and radiographic criteria described by Buser et al. 1990 ;1) absence of clinically detectable implant mobility; 2) absence of pain or any subjective sensation; 3) absence of recurrent peri-implant infection; and 4) absence of persistent radiolucency around the implant after 12 months of loading (Buser, Weber and Lang, 1990)
1 year
Emergence Angle
Time Frame: 1 year
The angle between the tangent line of the restoration at the most coronal point of the buccal mucosa and the implant long axis (Wang et al., 2022).
1 year

Collaborators and Investigators

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

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)

December 1, 2023

Primary Completion (Estimated)

December 30, 2024

Study Completion (Estimated)

February 1, 2025

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 11, 2023

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 11, 2023

First Posted (Estimated)

December 20, 2023

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimated)

December 20, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 11, 2023

Last Verified

December 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • NHR

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

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 Dental Implant

Clinical Trials on Placement of BLX implants 2 mm sub-crestal i

3
Subscribe