Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Completed
Administrative data
NCT number |
NCT05005377 |
Other study ID # |
1396.261 |
Secondary ID |
|
Status |
Completed |
Phase |
N/A
|
First received |
|
Last updated |
|
Start date |
December 1, 2016 |
Est. completion date |
March 1, 2020 |
Study information
Verified date |
July 2021 |
Source |
Tehran University of Medical Sciences |
Contact |
n/a |
Is FDA regulated |
No |
Health authority |
|
Study type |
Interventional
|
Clinical Trial Summary
The viability of Platelet Rich Fibrin (PRF) on enhancement of osseous and associated tissue
healing has been substantiated well in literature. This study aimed to assess peri-implant
soft and hard tissue changes after prosthetic loading of implants following socket
preservation with platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) and freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) in a
12-month period.
This Study evaluated 48 patients who were randomly divided into two groups for anterior ridge
preservation with PRF and FDBA. At 12 months after implant placement and prosthetic delivery,
bone loss was evaluated radiographically while soft tissue changes were evaluated by
measuring gingival recession, papilla index, and bleeding on probing (BOP). The differences
between the PRF and FDBA groups were analyzed using Fisher's exact test and student's t-test
(P<0.05).
Description:
This study was conducted on 48 patients over 18 years of age (average age of 38 years). The
patients required single-rooted incisor/premolar teeth extraction with a hopeless prognosis;
for whom, socket preservation with PRF or FDBA was later performed. The reasons for tooth
extraction included root fracture, failed root canal therapy, and extensive non-restorable
caries. The ethics and study design was approved the Research Ethics Committee of Tehran
University of Medical Sciences (IR.TUMS.DENTISTRY.REC.1396.2610) and conducted in accordance
with the Declaration of Helsinki. All patients signed an informed consent prior to
enrollment. They were free to leave the study at any time and ensured about the
confidentiality of their information. The exclusion criteria included a history of systemic
disease and head/neck radiotherapy, use of drugs affecting bone metabolism, smoking more than
10 cigarettes per day, the presence of significant periapical or periodontal lesions around
the respective teeth, and the presence of dehiscence or fenestration larger than 3mm in the
buccal bone plate. After extraction of the teeth, the patients underwent socket preservation
with the use of PRF or FDBA. 4 months later, they received a Zimmer ScrewVent bone-level
implant (Zimmer, Biomet, USA) which was left in place for 2 to 4 month (mandible and maxilla
respectively) to achieve proper osseointegration. All implants were successfully
osseointegrated. 10 patients were excluded during the study due to poor cooperation in the
follow-up period. Eventually, 38 patients including 23 females and 15 males were subjected to
hard and soft tissue assessments at 6 and 12 months, postoperatively. Patients in the PRF
group included 9 males and 9 females (a total of 18) with a mean age of 30.81 years (ranging
from 21 to 50 years). Patients in the FDBA group included 6 males and 14 females (a total of
20) with a mean age of 37.25 years (ranging from 22 to 50 years).
In second-stage surgery, a full-thickness flap was elevated and a gingival former (Zimmer,
Biomet, USA) matching the fixture size placed. Soft tissue healing around the gingival former
was allowed for 3 weeks and then a fixture level impression made using the closed-tray
impression technique by additional silicone (Panasil, Kettenbach GmbH & Co. KG, Eschenburg).
The master cast was poured with G-mask SnowRock (Velmix; MungyoGroup, Korea) and Moldano
dental stone (Tara, Iran). All selected abutments were straight, with a 0.5 mm gingival
height. If the gingival height around an implant was variable, the higher value was chosen
and other surfaces of the abutment were prepared such that the final finish line was
positioned 0.5 mm subgingivally. After abutment preparation, a metal framework was waxed-up
for a cement-retained metal-ceramic crown using resin pattern (GC Corporation, USA). The
framework was then cast (Wirobond® C, Bego, USA) and tried in the second session. Vita
Classic Shade Guide (Vitapan, Germany) was used to select the tooth shade. Porcelain
adjustments (VITA VM ceramic, VITA Zahnfabrik, Germany) including the contacts, occlusion,
contour and the esthetic appearance of the crown was performed at the third session. The
crowns were then glazed. In the fourth prosthetic session, the abutments were tighten to 25
N.Cm final torque and sealed with a Teflon band. The glazed crown was cemented with temporary
cement (TempBond, Kerr) and excess cement thoroughly removed. Complete seating of the crown
and excess cement removal were ensured in the first radiograph.
To assess the hard tissue stability around each implant, a digital radiograph (Digora Optime,
Acteon, India) was obtained with a size 2 sensor using a film holder (Kerr). All baseline and
follow-up radiographs were parallel and exposure settings were the same for each patient in
the baseline and follow-up radiographs. Using Scanora software (SCANORA lite, Soredex,
Helsinki, Finland), the distance from the crestal bone-fixture interface to the
abutment-crown interface (crown margin) was measured at the mesial and distal surfaces of the
implant at 0, 6 and 12 months after implant placement (Fig1).These measurements were repeated
3 times at the mesial and 3 times at the distal surfaces for each patient and the mean values
reported to minimize the errors. To assess soft tissue changes, clinical gingival parameters
including the gingival recession (defined as the change in the distance from the gingival
margin to the crown margin compared with time 0), the papilla index (distance from the tip of
the papilla to the crown margin in the mesial and distal surfaces) (Fig2), and bleeding on
probing (BOP) at the mesiobuccal and distobuccal points were measured at 0, 6 and 12 months,
postoperatively.
Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22. Qualitative variables were compared using Fisher's
exact test while quantitative variables were compared using unpaired student's t-test. The
level of significance was set at 0.05.