Dental Implant, Immediate Implant
Conditions
Keywords
immediate implant, esthetic zone, buccal plate, SLActive
Brief summary
The utilization of SLActive implants which allow more rapid osseointgeration with 3 to 4 weeks. will be placed in thin buccal bone as immediate implants to determine the resorption compared to thick buccal bone
Detailed description
With the increased demand for aesthetics and the expectation of immediate tooth replacement, improving the treatment options in case with hopeless teeth in the esthetic zone by immediate implants is a need by both practitioners and patients. Current guidelines, today, restricting such treatment to only thick (+ or = 1mm) buccal bone plates. However, the literature shows that less than 10% of the community have such criteria, making it a high risk but needed procedure. Soft tissue and bone remodelling after extraction is an inescapable fact. Immediate implant placement cannot prevent soft tissue and bone remodeling around implants (Araújo et al. 2005, Chen et al. 2009), but implant surface treatment and modifications might enhance the maintainability of the supporting structures around the dental implant due to its faster integration, better stimulating the vascular components at the site. This could be tested by the crestal and buccal bone changes, pink esthetic score and ostell readings.
Interventions
DEVICEimmediate implant placement
Minimally traumatic tooth extraction, immediate implant placement and hard tissue grafting. loading after 3 months.
Sponsors
Institut Straumann AG
Cairo University
Study design
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
1. Single bounded irrestorable tooth in the esthetic zone that needs to be extracted. 2. Healthy systemic condition. 3. Type I socket with a minimum of 1mm of buccal bone thickness prior to extraction. (Morton et al., 2014) 4. Sufficient bone apical to the socket for implant primary stability. (Morton et al., 2014) 5. Good oral hygiene. 6. Patient accepts a minimum of three-year follow-up period (cooperative patients).
Exclusion criteria
1. Signs of acute infection related to the area of interest. 2. Patients with parafunctional habits (Lobbezoo et al. 2006 and Roelhing et al. 2016). 3. Smokers (Lambert et al. 2000). 4. Pregnant females.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Bucccal bone changes | 12 months post loading | standardized Cone beam computed Tomography The radiograph will be taken preoperatively and 12 month after. The pre and post operative cone beams will be compared to each other observing any changes of the buccal bone at 2 , 4 and 6 mm from the crest, the measurements will be in mm |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Crestal bone changes | 12 months post loading | Periapical radiograph the measurements will be taken from the platform of the implants. 3 readings will be taken one at the paltform one above and one below according to pattern and form of the resorption. |
| Soft tissue thickness | 3 months | Periodontal probe |
| Post operative pain and swelling | 1 week | Blinded assessment ( numerical score) |
| Implant stability | 3 months | Ostell readings in isq (range from 55 till over 70) bleow 55 low stability over 55 till 65 moderate stability above 70 good stability |
| Postsurgical satisfaction | 1 week | Questionnaire |
| Pink aesthetic score | 12 months post loading | Pink esthetic score Scale 0 being the lowest and 14 highest attainable |
| Buccal bone thickness | 3 months | Cone Beam Computed Topography |
Countries
Egypt
Outcome results
None listed