Patient Satisfaction and Peri-Implant Tissue Success of Hybrid Ceramic Versus E-Max Superstructures

Esthetic Patient Satisfaction and Peri-Implant Tissue Success of Crystal Ultra Hybrid Ceramic Compared to E-Max Superstructures in Esthetic Zone

Status

UNKNOWN

Phases

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT02941575

Enrollment

Registered

2016-10-21

Start date

2016-12-31

Completion date

2018-05-31

Last updated

2016-10-21

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

Conditions

Prosthesis Survival

Brief summary

In patients receiving implants in the esthetic zone, would the use of new Nano hybrid ceramic crown material (Crystal Ultra) improve esthetic patient satisfaction and peri-implant tissue success when compared with Lithium Disilicate crown (E-max)?

Detailed description

The patient will be treated in visits designated as follows: Visit 1: Preoperative records, face-to-face adherence reminder session, signing consents, clinical, radiographic examination and primary impression for diagnostic cast construction. Visit 2: (first stage surgery): implant placement surgical procedure and postoperative radiograph. Visit 3: After 3months (second stage surgery): re-opening of surgical site, placement of healing abutments and temporary crowns. Visit 4: After 2 weeks, removing of temporary restorations and taking of final impressions Visit 5: placement of different ceramic crown superstructures and recording different outcome values.

Interventions

OTHERCrystal Ultra

Crystal Ultra: is a resin nano-ceramic material, that combines both advantages of ceramics and composites.

OTHERAll ceramic

IPS Emax: is an all ceramic crown that has proven superior aesthetics and strength properties.

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

DOUBLE (Caregiver, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

18 Years to 70 Years

Healthy volunteers

Yes

Inclusion criteria

1. Age above 18 years with at least one tooth missing in the esthetic area. 2. Available bone for implant placement: A. Labial and Palatal Plate of bone not less than 2mm. B. Mesio- distal dimension not less than 6.5mm. C. Bone length not less than 9mm. 3. Patient with good oral hygiene. 4. Class 1 occlusion. 5. Lack of excessive parafunctional activity leading to implant failure. 6. Tooth extracted not less than 6 month.

Exclusion criteria

1. Young patients in whom the jaws are still growing. (Less than 18 years). 2. Jaw pathology. 3. Smokers. 4. Uncontrolled Diabetic or particularly insulin-dependent. 5. Radiotherapy to the neck or face. 6. Multiple loss of teeth which may be indicated for more complicated procedure.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame	Description
Esthetic Patient satisfaction	1 year	Measurement unit is Binary

Secondary

Measure	Time frame	Description
Peri-implant tissue success (A-Marginal Bone Loss, B-Relative attachment level, C-Peri-Implant Probing depth, D-Sulcus bleeding)	1 year	Measurement unit is Categorical

Contacts

Primary ContactSherif Bushra

sherifsamir3000@hotmail.com01224029053

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026