Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Completed
Administrative data
NCT number |
NCT05739461 |
Other study ID # |
2022/158 |
Secondary ID |
|
Status |
Completed |
Phase |
|
First received |
|
Last updated |
|
Start date |
September 22, 2022 |
Est. completion date |
February 1, 2023 |
Study information
Verified date |
February 2023 |
Source |
Kocaeli University |
Contact |
n/a |
Is FDA regulated |
No |
Health authority |
|
Study type |
Observational
|
Clinical Trial Summary
The objective of this retrospective study with 5-year follow-up was to compare crestal bone
loss (CBL) and buccal bone thickness (BBT) around triangular cross-section neck (TN) to round
neck (RN) implants retaining mandibular overdentures, using cone-beam computed tomography
Description:
CBL is a multifactorial entity including factors related to patients, surgical technique,
prosthetic interventions, and implant design. Thus, new developments in implant micro- and
macro-features, such as modifications of surface characteristics and chemistry, type of
abutment connection, thread design, and neck design have been introduced over time parallel
to recent advances in implantology not only for reducing CBL, but also for preserving buccal
bone dimensions around implant. Furthermore, implant neck properties have been considered as
a determinant factor involved in maintenance of crestal bone around implant in various
trials. Nevertheless, there is no consensus with respect to the design of implant neck for
reducing CBL.
The most common implant neck design is the circular one; recently, however, a newly designed
implant with a triangular neck (TN) portion was introduced, which has reduction in the neck
portion on three sides. This neck design provides compression-free area to alveolar crest
during implant insertion to minimize CBL. In addition, TN design also would enhance the BBT
by increasing the space between the flat part of the triangle and the buccal bone cortex.
Based our previous study with one-year follow-up, despite the implants with novel neck design
showed a better crestal bone preservation compared to conventional neck design, long-term
clinical trials determining the effect of TN are missing for validating the success of this
new design. Unfortunately, the data derived from only very few short-term comparative
clinical trials to date do not provide an answer on benefits of TN design over the CN
implants regarding preserving crestal bone level.
Thus, this retrospective study with up-to-x-month follow-up aimed to compare CBL and BBT
around implants with TN and RN retaining mandibular overdentures. The null hypothesis was
that there was a difference in CBL and BBT between two implant designs in the long-term
follow-up.