Dental Implants, Tooth Loss
Conditions
Keywords
Dental implants, Piezoelectric osteotomy, Piezoelectric surgery, Immediate load
Brief summary
Compare the survival rate of the implants placed using the ultrasonic technique and placed using conventional drilling, with an immediate load on the aesthetic zone.
Detailed description
Main goals. Compare the survival rate of the implants placed using the ultrasonic technique and placed using conventional drilling, with an immediate load on the aesthetic zone. Specific goals. * Evaluate the marginal peri-implant bone loss after the healing period through radiographs, from the day of surgery, to a month, to 3 and 6 months after and a year after the implants insertion. * Evaluate the primary stability of each individual implant the day of their insertion to verify their load on the moment of surgery and also compare the values of each preparation techniques of implant bone preparation. * Evaluate the secondary stability of each individual implant and compare the values of each preparation techniques. * Evaluate the peri-implant clinic parameters within 3 and 6 months and a year after the insertion of the implants through these variables: probing depth and bleeding of probing.
Interventions
PROCEDUREPiezoelectric osteotomy.
Implants placed using the ultrasonic technique.
PROCEDUREConventional drilling
Implants placed using drilling technique
Sponsors
Universidad de Granada
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Intervention model description
Randomized clinical trials.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Absence of teeth on the aesthetic zone, whether its an incisor, canine or premolar. * 3 months after the dental extraction without alveolar scar tissue remains. * Bone availability of at least 5mm of width and 13mm of length. * At least 2 to 3 mm of soft tissue for the establishment of an adequate peri-implant biological width. * Oclusal pattern that ensures prosthetic success. * Implants need to have at least a 35 N and 70 ISQ index to be loaded. * Index of plaque \< 20% and/or inactive periodontal disease.
Exclusion criteria
* Acute myocardial infarction in the last 2 months. * Uncontrolled coagulation disorders * Uncontrolled diabetes (HbA1c\> 7.5%). * Radiotherapy on head/neck in the last 24 months. * Immunocompromised patient. * History of medication related to osteonecrosis of the jaws. * Psychiatric disorders, alcohol, drugs and large smokers (\>10 cigarrillos). * Plaque index \> 20%. * Need for simultaneous or previous peri-implant guided bone regeneration procedures.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Marginal Bone Loss | 1 month | To compare MBL measured using radiographs. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Primary stability | Baseline | Implant Stability Quotient Values (Osstell ISQ, Osstell USA) obtained from implants in study site, recording immediately. |
| Secondary stability | 3 months | Implant Stability Quotient Values (Osstell ISQ, Osstell USA) obtained from implants in study site, recording at 3 months. |
| Probing depth | 3,6,12 months | Evaluate the peri-implant clinic parameters within 3 and 6 months and a year after the insertion of the implants through these variables: probing depth and bleeding of probing. |
| Bleeding of probing | 3,6,12 months | Evaluate the peri-implant clinic parameters within 3 and 6 months and a year after the insertion of the implants through these variables: probing depth and bleeding of probing. |
| Survival rate | 3,6,12 months | To measure implant success rate. |
Countries
Spain
Outcome results
None listed