Implant Therapy
Conditions
Keywords
Osseodensification
Brief summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate the effects of osseodensification vs. traditional implant site preparation clinically , radiographically, bio-chemically. in patients of both sexes, ages 25 to 45, who had bilaterally missed maxillary teeth. The main questions it aims to answer are :which technique was the better results give at implant placement? Researchers will compare Osseodensification maneuver in implant placement to see if implant stability increased also peri-implant tissue accurately formed or the same in traditional implant site preparation. Participants will receiving dental implants in narrow maxillary posterior ridge via small diameter implant in conventional method in first entity while in second entity implant by osseodensification technique using densah bur.
Interventions
PROCEDUREconventional implant placement method
Site marking was the first step in preparing the place for implantation. Subsequently, using a high speed surgical handpiece and a surgical motor, a pilot drill was revolved at 1200 RPM in a clockwise rotation to the desired depth, creating a 1.5 mm first pilot osteotomy. An X-ray was obtained using paralleling pins to validate the angle between the surrounding teeth and the implants. Eventually the implant's precise placement was established. To prepare the osteotomy site to the desired diameter, drills are used sequentially at 1200 RPM in a clockwise motion. Gradually bigger drill diameters were used for incremental drilling. Based on the diameter of the desired implant, bur sizes were utilized in ascending order
PROCEDUREOsseodensification to implant placement using densah bur kit
Beginning with site marking, the area was prepared for implantation. A high speed surgical handpiece and a surgical motor (surgic pro® NSK, Japan) were then used to construct a 1.5 mm initial pilot osteotomy using a pilot drill spun at 1200 RPM in a clockwise rotation to the desired depth. In order to verify the angle between the surrounding teeth and the implants, paralleling pins were used to capture an X-ray. After it was determined that the implant was in the proper location, OD was used to extend the osteotomy using a Densah® Bur VT1525 2.0-mm (VersahTM, LLC, USA) in non-cutting anticlockwise rotation at 1200 RPM (Densifying Mode). The osteotomy was expanded to the desired diameter by repeatedly using a DensahTM Bur operating in a non-cutting anticlockwise (CCW) direction at 1200 RPM (Densifying Mode). Gradually increasing drill diameters were used for incremental drilling. Based on the diameter of the desired implant, bur sizes (diameters) were utilised in ascending order
Sponsors
Al-Azhar University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* All patients were free from any systemic diseases * Individuals above age of 18 who have thin ridges and missing bilateral maxillary posterior teeth
Exclusion criteria
* Severe skeletal discrepancy. * Para functional habits. * Patients who had already received or lost implants in the potential implantation site. * Smoker patients.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Implant primary stability | A single time point (once immediately after implant placement) | Osstell® Mentor magnetic resonance instrument used to measure primary stability |
| Bone density | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 weeks (at the beginning, one, three-, and six-months following implant insertion) | Measuring of bone density (BD) through using the image J analysis software application |
| Assessment of interleukin -6 | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 weeks (at the beginning, one, three-, and six-months following implant insertion) | — |
| Assessment of Vascular endothelial growth factor | [Time Frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 weeks (at the beginning, one, three-, and six-months following implant insertion)] | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Peri-implant probing depth | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 weeks (at the beginning, three-, and six-months following implant insertion) |
Countries
Egypt
Outcome results
None listed