Implant Stability, Low Speed Drilling
Conditions
Brief summary
This study aims to evaluate the effect of biological drilling osteotomy protocol compared to conventional osteotomy protocol in delayed implant placement in the posterior mandible regarding implant stability Type of study design: Randomized Clinical Trial In patient indicated for delayed implant placement in the lower posterior mandible will the use of biological drilling protocol osteotomy compared to conventional drilling protocol osteotomy differ regarding implant stability at three months?
Interventions
PROCEDUREBiological drilling osteotomy protocol
* Osteotomy site preparation through sequential biologic drilling in healed bony site with a pilot drill at 800 rpm with irrigation initiates the drilling process, which is then followed by drills of different sizes and shapes at low speeds at 150rpm without irrigation. * The implant will be positioned in the osteotomy site and a healing collar will be placed.
PROCEDUREConventional drilling osteotomy protocol
* Preparation for osteotomy site with conventional sequential drilling in healed bony site at 1200 rpm with irrigation. * The implant will be positioned in the osteotomy site and a healing collar will be placed.
Sponsors
Cairo University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
21 Years to 60 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Systemically healthy male and female patients, aged 21 to 60 years old, * Indicated for delayed implant placement in the posterior mandibular arch. * Good oral health. * Willingness to sign the informed consent form.
Exclusion criteria
* Heavy smoker (\> 10 cigarettes/day) * Pregnant females * Contraindication for Implant surgery. * Patients with poor oral hygiene. * A history of radiotherapy in the head or neck region. * Patients with systemic disease like uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, coagulation disorders, alcohol or drug abuse not suitable for implantation.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Implant stability (Implant Stability Quotient ) | Measurements will be taken immediately post surgical ,3 weeks,2 month and 3 months post surgical | Scale ranges from 1 to 100, the higher the Implant stability quotient the more stability |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Crestal bone level changes | Measurements will be taken immediately post surgical and after 3 months post surgical | Long-cone intraoral radiographs were collected under controlled circumstances with personalised X-ray holders (XPC) and a registration bite block for repeatable imaging. The periapical radiographs carried out by digital sensor size 2 standardized film and standardized exposure settings The neck of the implant was taken as a reference point in all images for standardization post surgically and after 3 months. |
| Post-Operative Pain ( visual analogue scale) | 7 days post surgically | Filled in by the patient after being given instructions about charting by the dental operator |
| Post-operative swelling (Verbal rating scale) | Swelling will be assessed 7 days post surgically | Filled in by the patient after being given instructions about charting by the dental operator. * Absent(no swelling) * Slight (intraoral swelling at the operated area) * Moderate (moderate intraoral swelling at the operated area) * Intense (intensive extra oral swelling extending beyond the operated area). |
| Post-Operative patient's Satisfaction | 3 months post surgically | Three Yes or No Questions will be asked to the patient about his overall satisfaction about the procedure |
Countries
Egypt
Contacts
Primary ContactMazen Mostafa, master in periodontology
Outcome results
None listed