Skip to content

Effects of Implant Placement Depth (4 mm Versus 6 mm) on Crestal Bone Stability in Immediate Implant Placement: A Clinical Study With 1-Year Post-Restorative Results

Effects of Implant Placement Depth (4 mm Versus 6 mm) on Crestal Bone Stability in Immediate Implant Placement: A Clinical Study With 1-Year Post-Restorative Results

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07574710
Enrollment
35
Registered
2026-05-08
Start date
2021-02-08
Completion date
2024-09-16
Last updated
2026-06-08

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

Conditions

Dental Implant, Marginal Bone Loss Around Implants, Primary Stability of the Implants, Tooth Extractions

Keywords

dental implant

Brief summary

The aim of a study was to analyze the effect of implant placement depth (4 mm versus 6 mm below the mid-facial gingival margin) on marginal bone loss (MBL) around implant and implant stability during immediate implant placement after tooth extraction. Clinical trial was conducted involving 35 patients requiring immediate implant placement after tooth extraction. Implants were placed either 4 mm (control group) or 6 mm (test group) below the mid-facial gingival margin. Primary outcome was deemed to be radiographic assessment of marginal bone level from periapical radiographs. Secondary outcome was implant stability quotient registration using resonance freaquency analyzer. The null hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in peri-implant marginal bone loss between implants placed at 4 mm depth versus 6 mm depth relative to the buccal gingival margin during immediate implant placement.

Interventions

PROCEDUREImplants were positioned 4 mm below the mid-facial gingival margin

Tooth was carefully extracted and implant was placed 4 mm below free gingival margin of the extracted tooth.

PROCEDUREImplant was placed 6 mm below free gingival margin

Tooth was extracted and dental implant placed 6 mm below free gingival margin of the extracted tooth.

Sponsors

Tomas Linkevicius
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1\) age ≥ 18 years; (2) generally healthy individuals with no medical contraindications for implant surgery; (3) healthy soft tissue, indicated by bleeding on probing (BOP) \< 20% and Plaque Index (PI) \< 25%; (4) keratinized gingiva ≥ 2 mm, both buccally and lingually; (5) presence of molar or premolar in the upper or lower jaw; (6) implant primary stability ≥ 35 Ncm; (7) intact alveolar bone walls post-extraction; (8) one study implant per patient; and (9) signed informed consent with permission to utilize data for research purposes

Exclusion criteria

(1) smoking (≥ 10 cigarettes/day); (2) history of uncontrolled periodontitis; (3) uncontrolled diabetes or alcoholism; (4) medications known to impair healing; and (5) implant primary stability \< 35 Ncm

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Marginal bone loss around dental implantFrom implant restoration delivery till 1 year follow-up

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Implant stability quotientAfter implant placement and after 4 months

Countries

Lithuania

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Jun 9, 2026