Comparison of four and six implants based on the stress and material properties in people who have no teeth at all

Comparison between all-on-four and all-on-six treatment concepts and framework material on stress distribution for full mouth rehabilitation using three dimensional finite element analysis: A Biomechanical Study

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Phase 1Phase 2

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2021/08/035890

Enrollment

Registered

2021-08-24

Start date

Unknown

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2021-11-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Interventions

Intervention1: Patients who are completely edentulous and wants replacement of missing teeth: Patients who are completely edentulous and the form of replacement is all on six type of implant placement

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Age group 50-70 years Completely edentulous in terms of natural dentition requiring full mouth rehabilitation No systemic illness Ability to sign an informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Systemically compromised individuals Habit of smoking or tobacco chewing Active infection Patient with psychiatric disorders or unrealistic expectations Loss of follow-up

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
stress distribution on bone and implants for full-arch rehabilitation in terms of Ï?max, Ï?min, Ï?VM and displacement levels.Timepoint: 3 months	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
stress distribution on abutments for full-arch rehabilitation in terms of Ï?max, Ï?min, Ï?VM and displacement levels.Timepoint: 3 months	—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactAishwarya pandey

Institute of Medical sciences

aishwarya22.ace@gmail.com09140120152

Outcome results