Skip to content

Crestal Bone Changes Following Equi-crestal Versus Subcrestal Implant Placement

Radiographic Evaluation of Crestal Bone Changes Following Equi-crestal Versus Subcrestal Implant Placement in Mandibular Posterior Augmented Ridge. A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06760442
Enrollment
28
Registered
2025-01-06
Start date
2025-01-01
Completion date
2026-12-01
Last updated
2026-01-27

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

Conditions

Implant Therapy, Augmentation, Alveolar Ridge

Keywords

crestal bone level changes, subcrestal implant position, crestal implant position, augmented ridge, dental implants

Brief summary

Statement of problem: The stability of peri-implant bone is a crucial factor for the long-term success of dental implants, where crestal bone plays a significant role in both the primary as well as the long- term implant stability. A bone loss of 1.5 mm during the first year of loading has been acceptable according to the early standards. However, more bone stability can be expected with the development in implant designs and surfaces over the past decades. Aim of the study: the aim of this study is to radiographically assess the crestal bone changes following delayed implant placement in mandibular previously augmented posterior sites, comparing cases with equicrestal implant placement with subcrestal implant placement

Detailed description

Statement of problem: The stability of peri-implant bone is a crucial factor for the long-term success of dental implants, where crestal bone plays a significant role in both the primary as well as the long- term implant stability. A bone loss of 1.5 mm during the first year of loading has been acceptable according to the early standards. However, more bone stability can be expected with the development in implant designs and surfaces over the past decades. Aim of the study: the aim of this study is to radiographically assess the crestal bone changes following delayed implant placement in mandibular previously augmented posterior sites, comparing cases with equicrestal implant placement with subcrestal implant placement. Materials and methods: This prospective, parallel, randomized controlled clinical trial will have 36 participants who need implant placement at the posterior mandibular area where they previously received horizontal bone augmentation. They will be randomly allocated into 2 groups, where group A (test) will receive dental implant placed subcrestally and group B (control) will receive implant placed equicrestally. Crestal bone loss will be assessed by periapical radiographs at implant placement (T0), 3 months (T3), 6 months (T6), 12 months (T12) and 18 months (T18) following implant placement. Keratinized tissue width, and soft tissue thickness will be measured clinically by periodontal probe at the same time points. Buccal bone changes will be evaluated at 18 months compared with the preoperative cone beam computed tomography by fusion module. Patient satisfaction will be recorded at the end of the trial.

Interventions

Delayed implant placement 2 mm subcrestally in missing mandibular posterior site.

PROCEDURECrestal implant placement

Delayed implant placement equicrestally in missing mandibular posterior site.

Sponsors

Misr International University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

Participants will not know whether the implant is placed crestal or subcrestal Outcome assessor (primary and secondary outcomes) & biostatistician will be blinded.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
21 Years to 60 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Patients older than 21 years. * Patients having augmented (by 50/50 particulate xenograft and autogenous bone) edentulous posterior site with vertical bone height of \> 10 mm in the mandible with a width of ridge ≥ 7 mm * Adequate Inter-arch space for implant placement * Favorable occlusion (no traumatic occlusion). * Good oral hygiene.•Accepts 18 months follow-up period (cooperative patient) * The patient provides informed consent.

Exclusion criteria

* Patients with inadequate bone volume and/ or quality * Patients with remaining roots or with signs of acute infection related to the area of interest. * Patients having systemic conditions that interfere with normal wound healing * Patients with habits that may jeopardize the implant longevity and affect the results of the study such as parafunctional habits . * Smoker patients. * Pregnant women.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Crestal bone changesat baseline,3, 6 ,12 and 18 monthsPeriapical digital radiographs to determine the amount of crestal bone lose in mm

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Keratinized tissue widthat baseline, 3,6,12 and 18 monthsKeratinized tissue width using periodontal probe in mm
Patient satisfactionat baseline, 6 ,12 and 18 monthsQuestionnaire

Countries

Egypt

Contacts

CONTACTHani El Nahas Professor, Professor
hani.elnahass@dentistry.cu.edu.eg01221334637
CONTACTZainab Hafez Abdel Rahman, Lecturer
Zeinab.hafez@miuegypt.edu.eg+0201221334637
STUDY_CHAIRhani el nahas professor, Professor

Misr International University

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026