Immediate Dental Implants Connective Tissue Graft Esthetic Zone
Conditions
Keywords
Immediate dental implant, Connective tissue graft, Esthetic zone.
Brief summary
Aim of current study to evaluate connective tissue graft combined with immediate implant placement as an innovative option for less facial gingival tissue recession, less pocket depth and less clinical attachment loss versus immediate implant alone.
Detailed description
P: Adult patients with single or multiple non-restorable teeth in esthetic zone I: Immediate implant + Connective tissue graft. C: Immediate implant alone. O: Primary Outcome: Facial gingival level Secondary Outcome: Patient satisfaction, probing depth, probing attachment loss, tissue biotype, keratinized mucosal width and bleeding on probing. P.M will select patients from the outpatient clinic of the Oral Medicine and Periodontology Department - Cairo University. Screening of patients will continue until the target population is achieved. Identifying and recruiting potential subjects is achieved through patient database.
Interventions
PROCEDUREIntervention group:(Group B) connective tissue graft combined with immediate implant.
Patients will be treated with connective tissue graft combined with immediate implant.
Sponsors
Cairo University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Masking description
Blinded participants: patient will be ensured by masking the instruments during the surgery. The patient will be informed of the steps of the surgery (as mentioned in the consent form) without getting into details. Blinding to the clinical, radiographic assessors is done by not involving them in sequence generation or allocation concealment or surgery performing.
Intervention model description
The patients was randomly classified into two groups: Group A: Patient will be treated with immediate implant alone. Group B: Patients will be treated with connective tissue graft combined with immediate implant.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 55 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
1. 18-55 2. Patients with single or multiple non-restorable teeth in maxillary anterior or premolar area. 3. Patients with adequate bone volume for the dental implant procedure. 4. Patients who are compliant to oral hygiene measures. 5. Patient consent approval and signing.
Exclusion criteria
1. Heavy smokers. 2. Systemic disease that contraindicates implant placement or surgical procedures. 3. No or poor patient's compliance. 4. Psychological problems. 5. Pathology at the site of intervention. 6. Pregnancy females.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Facial gingival level | Up to 6 months | FGL was evaluated by measuring the distance between the level of soft tissues and the lower border of the customized template that was used as a reference line at three readings mesially, mid-facially and distally. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Patient satisfaction | Up to 6 month | Post-Surgical Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSPSQ). The patient questionnaire evaluates patients' perception and subjective admiration of the final result of the treatment |
| Tissue biotype | Up to 6 months | Thickness of the peri-implant mucosa around the implant |
| Pink esthetic score | Up to 6 months | seven different variables: mesial papilla, distal papilla, facial soft-tissue level, soft tissue contour, alveolar process deficiency, soft-tissue color and texture at the facial aspect of the implant site |
| Pain score | Up to 12 days | Visual analog scale was recorded every day for 12 days follow-up and the patient marks on the line the point they feel that it represents their response |
| Bleeding on probing | Up to 6 months | Bleeding was provoked by sweeping the peri-implant mucosal sulcus using a periodontal probe. |
| Probing depth | Up to 6 months | distance from the peri- implant mucosal margin to the bottom of the peri-implant sulcus |
| Probing attachment level | Up to 6 months | distance from the base of the peri-implant sulcus to the implant shoulder using periodontal probe at four sites |
| Width of keratinized mucosa | Up to 6 months | distance from the mucogingival junction (MGJ) to the gingival margin |
Countries
Egypt
Outcome results
None listed