Supracrestal tissue height augmentation using a volume-stable collagen matrix. A retrospective case series.

Supracrestal tissue height augmentation using a volume-stable collagen matrix. A retrospective case series. - Supracrestal soft tissue augmentation

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

DRKS

Registry ID

DRKS00035118

Enrollment

Registered

2025-05-13

Start date

2025-06-23

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-02-02

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

Conditions

K08.1

Interventions

Group 1: Patients who were treated with a soft tissue augmentation procedure using a soft tissue substitute simultaneosuly with implant placement are invited for one follow-up study visit. The final r

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

20 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: • Patients having received a supracrestal tissue height augmentation during implant placement. • Patients presented a thin peri-implant tissues in the vertical dimension (<2mm) at implant placement. • Signed informed consent form

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: • Pregnant or lactating women (Pregnancy test available for female patients of childbearing potential (if needed) • Implant failure prior to the study procedure

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Gain of the supracrestal tissue height between before implant placement and after follow-up examination (>6 months post delivery of final restorations). Radiographical analysis (CBCT Dicom file and superimposed STL file) taken pre-surgery (implant planning) and at the follow-up examination)	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Biological and clinical parameters at the implant and adjacent sites: • Width of Keratinized Tissue (KTW) (mid-buccal) • Mucosal thickness (MT) • Probing Pocket Depth (PPD) at 6 sites • Vestibular depth • Bleeding on Probing (BoP) at 6 sites • Modified sulcus bleeding index at 6 sites • Plaque index (PI) at 6 sites Radiographic parameters: • Marginal bone level changes between implant placement and delivery of the final reconstruction and the follow-up examination • Buccal bone thickness (in mm) Patient reported outcomes: • PROMs Patient satisfaction using an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) from 0 to 10 o Brushing discomfort o Overall satisfaction with the esthetic outcome of the treatment	—

Measure

Time frame

Biological and clinical parameters at the implant and adjacent sites: • Width of Keratinized Tissue (KTW) (mid-buccal) • Mucosal thickness (MT) • Probing Pocket Depth (PPD) at 6 sites • Vestibular depth • Bleeding on Probing (BoP) at 6 sites • Modified sulcus bleeding index at 6 sites • Plaque index (PI) at 6 sites Radiographic parameters: • Marginal bone level changes between implant placement and delivery of the final reconstruction and the follow-up examination • Buccal bone thickness (in mm) Patient reported outcomes: • PROMs Patient satisfaction using an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) from 0 to 10 o Brushing discomfort o Overall satisfaction with the esthetic outcome of the treatment

—

Countries

Switzerland

Contacts

Public ContactAnina Zürcher

Klinik für Rekonstruktive Zahnmedizin, Zentrum für Zahnmedizin, Universiät Zürich

anina.zuercher@zzm.uzh.ch+41 44 634 04 04

Outcome results

None listed

Source: DRKS (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 7, 2026