Skip to content

Evaluation of the effect of two incision techniques on the soft tissue dimensions around the implant

Evaluation of the effect of sulcular incision versus papilla sparing incision on the tooth-implant papilla dimensions, a randomized clinical study

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
IRCT
Registry ID
IRCT20231115060069N1
Enrollment
46
Registered
2023-11-19
Start date
2024-03-24
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-01-22

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

Conditions

Incision technique in implant insertion.

Interventions

Intervention 1: Intervention group: papilla sparing incision. Intervention 2: Control group: sulcular incision.

Sponsors

Tehran University of Medical Sciences
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
All
Age
18 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: patients aging over 18 years who refer to the periodontics department of Tehran Faculty of Dentistry need implant placement in the edentulous area in anterior or posterior region in a delayed or late implantation. The presence of teeth on the mesial or distal side or both sides of the edentulous area patients without systemic conditions interfering with surgery (ASA 1 or 2) Non-smokers or less than 10 cigarettes per day presence of periodontal health (less than 4 areas with probe depth greater than 4 mm) Fullmouth bleeding score and fullmouth plaque score less than 25% Having informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Pregnancy and lactation Having diabetes The need for an implant in the posterior second molar region The tooth adjacent to the edentulous area have a clinical attachment loss of more than 2 mm The need for simultaneous soft and hard tissue reconstruction and flap advancement at the time of implant placement The implant adjacent to the free end edentulous area The patient's lack of consent to continue cooperation in the research project Severe side effects during treatment The impossibility of placing the healing abutment on the day of surgery Improper position of the implant

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Changes in the height of the papilla adjacent to the edentulous area. Timepoint: Baseline, 3 months after surgery. Method of measurement: image j software.;Changes in the volume of the papilla adjacent to the edentulous area. Timepoint: Baseline, 3 months after surgery. Method of measurement: image j software.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
The presence of scar tissue. Timepoint: 3 months after surgery. Method of measurement: mucoal scarring index.;Implant position. Timepoint: Immediately after implant placement. Method of measurement: Parallel periapical radiograph.;The amount of gingival recession. Timepoint: At baseline, 3 months after surgery. Method of measurement: Michigan probe with Williams numbering as the difference in the distance of the gingival margin from the mucogingival line.;Probing depth. Timepoint: The baseline, 3 months after surgery. Method of measurement: Michigan probe with Williams numbering in buccal, lingual, mesial and distal points of adjacent teeth.

Countries

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Contacts

Public ContactMahsa Etemadi

Tehran University of Medical Sciences

mahsaemdi@gmail.com+98 913 401 1266

Outcome results

None listed

Source: IRCT (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026