Submerged vs. Nonsubmerged Single Laser-microgrooved Dental Implants.

Submerged vs. Nonsubmerged Single Laser-microgrooved Implants. Clinical and Radiographic Results at 3-years of RCT With Split Mouth Design.

Status

Completed

Phases

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT03674762

Enrollment

Registered

2018-09-18

Start date

2018-09-14

Completion date

2018-09-14

Last updated

2018-09-18

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

Conditions

Partially Edentulous Maxilla, Mandible

Keywords

submerged two-stage, nonsubmerged one-stage, dental implants, marginal bone loss

Brief summary

Aim: to evaluate and compare radiographic marginal bone loss (MBL) and soft tissue parameters around submerged/two-stage and nonsubmerged/one-stage single implants with same tapered body design and surface, same thread design and distance, and same collar surface (laser-microgrooved), after 3 years of loading.

Detailed description

Materials and methods: 20 submerged/two-stage implants and 20 nonsubmerged/one stage implants were placed randomly with a split mouth design, in 20 partially edentulous patients. Radiographic and clinical examinations were carried out at the implant placement (Baseline, BSL), at the delivery of prosthetic restorations (T0), and at each year of the follow-up period (T1, T2, T3). Plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and gingival recession (REC) were recorded. Radiographic marginal bone levels (MBL) were assessed at the mesial (MI) and distal (DI) aspect of implant sites. In addition, the influence of keratinized tissue thickness (KTT) on MBL was investigated.

Interventions

DEVICEMicrogrooved dental implants

Dental Implant placement

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

SEQUENTIAL

Primary purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

NONE

Intervention model description

The cases were randomly divided into two groups as two-stage/submerged, and one-stage/nonsubmerged. Thus, in each patient, the two implants (submerged and nonsubmerged) were placed randomly in the left and right hemi-mandible or in the left and right hemi-maxilla

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

18 Years to 80 Years

Healthy volunteers

Yes

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria were: age ≥ 18 years, good general health, without contraindications to implant surgery, presence of at least two non-adjacent edentulous sites requiring implant therapy. Each implant site had to be located in the left or right hemi-posterior mandible or in the left or right hemi- posterior maxilla. \-

Exclusion criteria

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
radiographic marginal bone loss	3 years

Countries

Italy

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 20, 2026