Comparison Between Socket Shield and Conventional Techniques in Immediate Implant Placement.

August 10, 2026 updated by: Omar Ibrahim Wahedi, Minia University

Comparative Study Between Using Socket Shield And Conventional Techniques In Immediate Implant Placement (A Randomized Clinical Trial)

The goal of this randomized clinical trial is to compare whether immediate implant placement using the socket-shield technique can better preserve bone density, bone level, and peri-implant tissue health compared to conventional immediate implant placement in patients requiring tooth extraction in the maxillary esthetic zone.

This study is conducted in systemically healthy adult patients aged 20-60 years who have non-restorable maxillary anterior teeth indicated for immediate implant placement.

The main questions this study aims to answer are:

Does the socket-shield technique result in better peri-implant bone density and bone level preservation compared to the conventional immediate implant technique?

Does the socket-shield technique lead to improved clinical peri-implant parameters, including probing depth, bleeding on probing, keratinized tissue width, and soft tissue thickness?

participants will be divided into two groups: (both groups will receive immediate implant placement of a tooth requiring extraction in the maxillary esthetic zone.) First group: will recieve immediate implant using conventional technique. second group: will recieve immediate implant using socket shield technique.

Participants will:

  • Undergo clinical and radiographic examinations, including cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
  • Receive immediate implant placement using either the conventional technique or the socket-shield technique.
  • Be followed up clinically and radiographically for 9 months to assess bone and soft tissue healing.
  • Attend regular postoperative and follow-up visits for evaluation of implant stability and peri-implant tissue health.

Study Overview

Status

Recruiting

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

16

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 Contact

Study Locations

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

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients aged between 20 and 60 years of both genders
  • All participants should be systemically healthy, as assessed using the dental modification of the Cornell Medical Index.
  • Gingival and periodontal health to be confirmed according to the criteria outlined in the new classification system proposed by Caton et al. (2018).
  • Presence of non-restorable teeth due to trauma, complicated crowns or root fractures.
  • Presence of extensive destructive caries making the tooth unsalvageable, particularly in esthetic zones.
  • Clinical indication for immediate implant placement, especially in cases where minimizing post-extraction bone resorption and soft tissue collapse is critical.
  • Availability of adequate interocclusal space to accommodate the necessary prosthetic components without occlusal interference.

Exclusion Criteria:

(for socket-shield technique)

  • Pregnant female.
  • Patients with parafunctional habits (e.g., bruxism, clenching).
  • Smokers.
  • Teeth with clinical mobility.
  • Teeth with root fractures extending below the alveolar bone level.
  • Periodontal ligament space widening.
  • Signs of internal or external root resorption.
  • Current or previous periodontal disease

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: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: GROUP I
Immediate Implant Placement Using Conventional Technique
Procedure: Conventional Technique
Immediate Implant Placement Using Conventional Technique
Experimental: GROUP II
Immediate Implant Placement Using Socket-Shield Technique
Procedure: Socket-Shield Technique
Immediate Implant Placement Using Socket-Shield Technique

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Bone Density Around Immediate Implants.
Time Frame: At baseline of implant placement then after 9 months

Assessment of bone mineral density using Gray scale values (GSV) derived from Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) scans. Measurements will be evaluated at the buccal bone adjacent to the retained root fragment (Socket Shield Group) and adjacent to the implant surface (Conventional Immediate Placement Group). The change will be calculated by subtracting the baseline value from the 9-month follow-up value.

Unit of Measure: Gray scale values Time Frame: Baseline to 9 months post-implant placement

Measure Description:

Bone density measured using average gray values extracted from CBCT DICOM files at the buccal aspect of the implant site. Gray scale values reflect the radiographic attenuation/pixel intensity of the surrounding bone.
At baseline of implant placement then after 9 months
Change in Marginal Bone Level Around Immediate Implants.
Time Frame: At baseline of implant placement then after 9 months.
  • Linear measurement of the distance from the implant platform to the first bone-to-implant contact point to assess crestal bone stability.
  • Unit of measure : Millimeters (mm).
At baseline of implant placement then after 9 months.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Probing Depth (PD)
Time Frame: 3 months, 6 months, and 9 months post-surgery.

Measurement of the distance from the peri-implant mucosal margin to the bottom of the clinical pocket using a calibrated periodontal probe.

Unit of Measure: Millimeters (mm)
3 months, 6 months, and 9 months post-surgery.
Modified Gingival Index (MGI)
Time Frame: 3 months, 6 months, and 9 months post-surgery.

Assessment of the visual signs of inflammation of the peri-implant soft tissues. Scores range from 0 to 4 (0 = Normal, 1 = Mild inflammation, 2 = Mild inflammation with color change, 3 = Moderate inflammation, 4 = Severe inflammation).

Unit of Measure: Score on a scale (0-4)
3 months, 6 months, and 9 months post-surgery.
Modified Plaque Index (MPI)
Time Frame: 3 months, 6 months, and 9 months post-surgery.

Assessment of the amount of plaque on the implant/restoration surface. Scores range from 0 to 3 :

  • 0 = No plaque
  • 1 = Plaque only recognized by running a probe
  • 2 = Plaque visible to the naked eye
  • 3 = Abundance of soft matter).

Unit of Measure: Score on a scale (0-3)
3 months, 6 months, and 9 months post-surgery.
Gingival Thickness (GT)
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 9 months post-surgery.

Assessment of the thickness of the peri-implant mucosa. This will be measured using a digital caliper or endodontic file with a rubber stopper 2mm apical to the gingival margin.

Unit of Measure: Millimeters (mm)
Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 9 months post-surgery.
Width of Keratinized Tissue (KTW)
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 9 months post-surgery.

Measured from the gingival margin to the mucogingival junction at the mid-facial aspect of the implant site.

Unit of Measure: Millimeters (mm)
Baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 9 months post-surgery.

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Sponsor

Minia University

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)

October 20, 2025

Primary Completion (Estimated)

October 1, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

November 1, 2026

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 15, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 10, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

August 12, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 12, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 10, 2026

Last Verified

August 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • MU-EC Research No.1187

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

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.

Subscribe