Conventional Static Surgical Guide, SocketFit Static Surgical Guide
Conditions
Keywords
immediate implant placement, Superimposition, Accuracy of implant placement
Brief summary
This study compares two types of surgical guides used during immediate dental implant placement in the upper front teeth. One guide is a conventional static surgical guide, while the other is a modified SocketFit static surgical guide designed to improve stability after tooth extraction. The purpose of the study is to determine whether the SocketFit guide improves the accuracy of implant placement.The findings may help improve the precision and predictability of immediate dental implant treatment in the anterior esthetic zone.
Detailed description
Immediate implant placement in the anterior esthetic zone is a predictable treatment option that reduces treatment time and preserves peri-implant soft and hard tissues. Static computer-guided surgery has improved the accuracy of implant placement; however, guide stability may be compromised immediately after tooth extraction because of complex morphology and angulation of post-extraction sockets, as well as variations in bone density.These factors can lead to surgical drill displacement, causing the implant to deviate from its intended trajectory.Therefore, The SocketFit static surgical guide incorporates a socket-engaging extension designed to enhance guide seating and stability during osteotomy preparation. Limited evidence is available regarding the accuracy of this modified guide compared with the conventional tooth-supported static surgical guide. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the accuracy of immediate implant placement using the SocketFit static surgical guide versus the conventional static surgical guide in the anterior esthetic zone. Accuracy will be assessed by comparing the planned and actual implant positions using postoperative Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) superimposition, evaluating coronal, apical, angular, and depth deviations.
Interventions
DEVICESocketFit Static Surgical Guide
Participants will undergo immediate implant placement in the anterior esthetic zone using the SocketFit static surgical guide. The guide incorporates a socket-engaging extension designed to enhance guide stability and drilling accuracy following atraumatic tooth extraction. Implant placement will be performed according to the planned digital workflow.
DEVICEConventional Static Surgical Guide
Participants allocated to the control group will undergo immediate implant placement in the anterior esthetic zone using a conventional tooth-supported static surgical guide designed through the standard digital workflow. Following atraumatic tooth extraction, the guide will be seated on the remaining teeth to direct sequential osteotomy preparation and implant placement according to the preoperative virtual implant plan. All other surgical procedures, implant system, drilling protocol, and postoperative management will be identical to those used in the experimental group.
Sponsors
Tanta University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)
Intervention model description
A randomized, controlled trial with an allocation ratio of 1:1 using two-arm parallel groups.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 35 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Patients in good health with absence of any relevant medical condition that contraindicates dental implant placement e.g. blood coagulation disorder. * Optimal compliance is evidenced by no missed treatment appointments and a positive attitude toward oral hygiene. * Extraction socket type I according to Ellian et al criteria with adequate native/apical bone to achieve primary implant stability and intact buccal plate of bone. * Thick mucosal phenotype. * Probing depth ≤ 3 mm at mid-buccal aspect of failing tooth. * Age ranged from 18- 35 years old of both genders.
Exclusion criteria
* Patients subjected to irradiation in the head and neck area. * Bisphosphonate therapy. * Females who are pregnant or trying to conceive, and nursing mothers. * Smokers and uncontrolled diabetic patients.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Coronal deviation | Immediately after implant placement following digital superimposition of the planned and actual implant positions. | The linear distance (mm) between the planned and actual implant positions at the coronal platform, measured by digital superimposition of the preoperative implant plan and postoperative Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) data. |
| apical deviation | Immediately after implant placement following digital superimposition of the planned and actual implant positions. | The linear distance (mm) between the planned and actual implant positions at the implant apex, measured using digital superimposition of the preoperative implant plan and postoperative Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) data. |
| depth(vertical) deviation | Immediately after implant placement following digital superimposition of the planned and actual implant positions. | The vertical difference (mm) between the planned and actual implant positions along the implant long axis, measured using digital superimposition of the preoperative implant plan and postoperative Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) data. |
| angular deviation | Immediately after implant placement following digital superimposition of the planned and actual implant positions. | The angular difference (degrees) between the long axes of the planned and actual implant positions, measured using digital superimposition of the preoperative implant plan and postoperative Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) data. |
Countries
Egypt
Contacts
CONTACTAliaa s. Kishk, Batchelor
CONTACTrehab f Ghouraba, PHD
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORAliaa s. Kishk, Batchelor
Tanta University
Outcome results
None listed