View clinical trials related to Dental Implants.
Filter by:Retrospective observational study of 500 implants placed between 2014 and 2020 of the same dental implant system (AstraTech Implant System EV, Dentsply Implants, Mölndal, Sweden).
This randomized clinical trial (RCT) study investigates if there is any difference in complication rate between perforated dense-polytetrafluroethylene (d-PTFE) mesh vs perforated d-PTFE mesh covered with a native collagen membrane. The primary endpoint is complication rate. The secondary endpoints are regeneration rate and pseudoperiosteum formation.
The aim of the study is to evaluate the relationship between submandibular fossa depth and gonial angle measurements in cone beam computed tomography examinations in terms of dental implant applications. Cone-beam computed tomography images of 51 dry human mandibles were included in the study.
Objective: The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to compare ceramic and titanium implants with respect to the esthetic and clinical parameters, and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Material and methods: Thirty patients received thirty implants (8-12 mm in length, 3.3 mm diameter and a tissue level design) to replace the absence of a single tooth in the anterior maxilla. Patients were randomly allocated to receive a ceramic or a titanium implant. Esthetic and clinical parameters and PROMs were evaluated 18 months after surgery.
Keratinized mucosa, which is composed of free gingiva and attached gingiva, is a barrier against bacterial invasion in oral cavity and provides good tissue sealing for periodontal environment. When the keratinized mucosa is insufficient, it is difficult to maintain the long-term stability of the implant, which is not conducive to the peri-implant health. It is generally believed that enough keratinized mucosa width is beneficial to reduce plaque accumulation and reduce the incidence rate of peri-implant diseases. In recent years, clinicians have gradually recognized that the thickness of keratinized mucosa plays an important role in maintaining the peri-implant health. Some researchers found that the thickness of mucosa is very important to maintain the aesthetic effect of implant restoration, and when the thickness of mucosa around the implant is less than 2mm, alveolar bone absorption will occur to maintain a stable biological width. A meta-analysis showed that when the thickness of the keratinized mucosa around the implant was greater than 2mm, the amount of marginal bone loss was significantly reduced (- 0.8mm, P < 0.0001). It is considered that autogenous soft tissue graft is the most reliable technology to augment keratinized mucosa. Subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) is a mucogingival surgery that transplant autologous free connective tissue under the pedicled semi thick flap to augment keratinized mucosa. It can effectively increase the thickness of soft tissue, cover the exposed implant, and reconstruct the interdental papilla. It is the gold standard for peri-implant soft tissue agumentation. Keratinized mucosal thickening surgery may be done prior to the surgical phase, after the surgical phase, before loading, or even after loading. It is believed that keratinized mucosal thickening at the same time of implantation can effectively reduce the possibility of mucosal recession after implantation, reduce the amount of marginal bone absorption in the process of osseointegration, which is conducive to maintaining the long-term stability of the implant. For the sake of clear clinical vision and convenient operation, clinicians often choose to thicken the keratinized mucosa during the secondary operation, and also obtain good postoperative effect. However, after the completion of the final repair, the keratinized mucosa thickening surgery increases the difficulty of operation and the technical requirements for the operator. In clinical practice, it is rarely selected to perform keratinized mucosal thickening at this time. At present, the effectiveness of timing on the outcome of soft tissue augmentation is still debated, and, most importantly, a direct comparison between simultaneous and staged procedures remains underexplored. Therefore, this clinical trial is to prospectively compare the clinical efficacy of simultaneous versus delayed timing of soft tissue augmentation by SCTG placement around single implants, by evaluating the peri-implant marginal bone level change and soft tissue change, so as to provide reference for the formulation of clinical treatment plan and the selection of the best operation time.
comparing immediate functionally loaded implants and immediate non functionally loaded implants in the posterior mandibular region on bases of bone density and bone loss evaluated by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
Compare the survival rate of the implants placed using the ultrasonic technique and placed using conventional drilling, with an immediate load on the aesthetic zone.
The aim of this clinical study is to compare two different approaches during dental implant applications. One group of patients in the study received flapless approach which is performed without surgical reflection of soft tissues (gums) during implant surgery. In the control group of the study, patients received conventional flap approach in which flap reflections performed on soft tissues (gums) of the patients. After the surgery patients were monitored for marginal bone loss around implants and discomfort after the surgery for 3 months. And received data statistically analyzed to compare the different surgical procedures.
It is necessary to evaluate the outcome of implant supported fixed prosthetic rehabilitations using peek material. To test this, the study design to be used will be a prospective single cohort to evaluate the long term outcome of fixed prosthetic implant supported rehabilitations. The cohort will be evaluated after 5 years of follow-up, regarding prosthetic survival, implant survival, marginal bone resorption, incidence of mechanical complications (loosening or fracture of prosthetic components), biological complications (peri-implant pathology, suppuration, fistulae), incidence of biological complications (peri-implant pathology, suppuration, excessive marginal bone resorption) in-mouth comfort, overall chewing feeling, framework integrity, veneer adhesion, veneer chipping, patient tissue reaction, denture staining, manufacture issues,
Introduction: Single-stage dental implant placement protocol involves the placement of healing abutments. In addition to osseointegration process, healing of peri-implant soft tissues is of a great importance too. Routinely, healing abutments made of titanium (Ti) are used. The aim is to find novel materials that would have the same mechanical properties, but less prone to plaque-adhesion and therefore showing lower local inflammatory soft tissue response. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is a thermoplastic polymer that has favorable mechanical characteristics, high biocompatibility and low submissiveness to microorganism adhesion. White color makes it aesthetically acceptable in the treatment of patients with thin gingival phenotype. The Aim: To compare the formation of dental plaque on PEEK and Ti healing abutments and examine the local response of peri-implant tissues. Materials and Methods: The study included 11 patients with at least two missing teeth in the posterior regions. In each patient, 2 implants were installed, with PEEK abutment (experimental group) placed on one implant, while on the other implant, Ti abutment (control group) was placed. Before prosthetic rehabilitation of patients, both abutments were replaced with new ones and a thin layer of peri-implant soft tissue was sent to histological analysis. Results: The average age of patients was 49 years. Out of 11 patients, 27% were female and 73% male. 36% of respondents were smokers. Histological immunohistochemical analysis of samples of peri-implant soft tissues showed massive inflammatory infiltration in subepithelial tissue in the experimental group (10/11), while the inflammatory infiltrate in the control group was classified as moderate (7/11) or weak (4/11). Conclusion: Both types of healing abutments have been shown to be successful in single-stage implantation protocol. However, contrary to expectations and preliminary findings from the literature, PEEK healing abutments showed a more pronounced inflammatory response of the surrounding soft tissues relative to Titanium abutments.