Edentulism
Conditions
Brief summary
The aim of this study is to assess the three-dimensional accuracy of direct intraoral scanning in All-on-4 implant-supported prostheses by comparing intraoral scan data with a custom-made verification jig.
Interventions
OTHERScanning with verification jig
Comparing Relative Implant Positions of the 4 implants in each case obtained through desktop scanning of intraoral provisional verification jig. All-on-4 treatment for mandibular and maxillary edentulous cases were scanned using the Medit i700 intraoral scanner. Scan data were imported into Exocad software, where scan-body matching was performed using the Neodent library to determine the positions of multiunit abutment analogues.
OTHERDirect intraoral scanning
Comparing Relative Implant Positions of the 4 implants in each case obtained through direct intraoral scanning without jig. All-on-4 treatment for mandibular and maxillary edentulous cases were scanned using the Medit i700 intraoral scanner. Scan data were imported into Exocad software, where scan-body matching was performed using the Neodent library to determine the positions of multiunit abutment analogues.
Sponsors
Alexandria University
Yasser Ahmed
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Patients with complete mandibular edentulism. * Patients requiring full-arch rehabilitation with an All-on-4 implant concept. * Absence of systemic conditions that could affect bone healing or osseointegration. * Adequate bone volume in the anterior mandible for implant placement without the need for additional grafting. * Patients capable of maintaining oral hygiene
Exclusion criteria
* Patients with uncontrolled systemic diseases (e.g., diabetes, osteoporosis). * History of head and neck radiation therapy. * Severe parafunctional habits (e.g., bruxism). * Patients with inadequate bone volume requiring extensive grafting procedures. * Active periodontal or oral infections.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Vertical Deviation | through study completion, an average of 1 year | Analogues Saved from the Intraoral scan and those saved from stone model were superimposed. The vertical discrepancy (mm) in implant position between intraoral digital scanning and verification jig-based stone model in All-on-4 implant cases. |
| Angular deviation | through study completion, an average of 1 year | Analogues Saved from the Intraoral scan and those saved from stone model were superimposed. The angular difference (degrees) in implant position between intraoral digital scanning and verification jig-based stone model in All-on-4 implant cases. |
| Horizontal deviation | through study completion, an average of 1 year | Analogues Saved from the Intraoral scan and those saved from stone model were superimposed. The horizontal discrepancy (mm) in implant position between intraoral digital scanning and verification jig-based stone model in All-on-4 implant cases. |
Countries
Egypt
Outcome results
None listed