The performance of a two-unit bridge supported by one implant in the lateral part of the upper and lower jaw

Single implant-supported two-unit cantilever fixed partial dentures in the posterior region: a retrospective case series with a mean follow-up of 6.5 years

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

ISRCTN

Registry ID

ISRCTN79055740

Enrollment

Registered

2021-03-14

Start date

2018-10-01

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2021-08-30

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

Conditions

Evaluation of the functioning of implant-supported cantilever fixed partial dentures Oral Health

Interventions

Patients who received a single implant-supported fixed partial denture with a cantilever in the posterior region between January 2004 and February 2018 are included. The survival rate of the implants

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: All patients treated with a single implant-supported two-unit cantilever FPD in the posterior region of maxilla or mandible between the period January 1st, 2004 and January 1st, 2018 in a private referral practice in Apeldoorn, The Netherlands. The inclusion criteria for the study are: 1. One dental implant restored with a crown with one cantilever unit positioned mesially or distally, in the posterior region of maxilla or mandible 2. Presence of antagonistic teeth 3. Follow-up period at least 1 year after placement of the restoration 4. Presence of a radiograph taken directly after placement of the implant

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Does not meet the inclusion criteria

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Survival rate of implants assessed using clinical examination at the follow-up evaluation	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
1. Marginal bone level (MBL) measured using radiographic assessments at baseline and during the follow-up evaluation 2. Clinical assessments by one examiner at the follow-up evaluation: 2.1. Plaque assessed per implant using the modified plaque index 2.2. Presence of calculus observed during clinical examination 2.3. Bleeding assessed per implant using the modified sulcus bleeding index 2.4. Gingival health assessed per implant using the gingival index 2.5. Probing depth assessed at four sites per implant using a manual standardized pressure periodontal probe (Click-Probe®, Kerr, Bioggio, Switzerland) measuring to the nearest 1 mm 3. Complications recorded from medical records at the follow-up evaluation 4. Patients’ satisfaction measured using OHIP-NL49 and VAS questionnaire at the follow-up evaluation	—

Measure

Time frame

1. Marginal bone level (MBL) measured using radiographic assessments at baseline and during the follow-up evaluation 2. Clinical assessments by one examiner at the follow-up evaluation: 2.1. Plaque assessed per implant using the modified plaque index 2.2. Presence of calculus observed during clinical examination 2.3. Bleeding assessed per implant using the modified sulcus bleeding index 2.4. Gingival health assessed per implant using the gingival index 2.5. Probing depth assessed at four sites per implant using a manual standardized pressure periodontal probe (Click-Probe®, Kerr, Bioggio, Switzerland) measuring to the nearest 1 mm 3. Complications recorded from medical records at the follow-up evaluation 4. Patients’ satisfaction measured using OHIP-NL49 and VAS questionnaire at the follow-up evaluation

—

Countries

Netherlands

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 21, 2026