Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Completed
Administrative data
NCT number |
NCT03425864 |
Other study ID # |
2010 |
Secondary ID |
|
Status |
Completed |
Phase |
N/A
|
First received |
|
Last updated |
|
Start date |
July 11, 2017 |
Est. completion date |
October 13, 2020 |
Study information
Verified date |
October 2020 |
Source |
Cairo University |
Contact |
n/a |
Is FDA regulated |
No |
Health authority |
|
Study type |
Interventional
|
Clinical Trial Summary
The goal of the present study is to compare the esthetic result and stability of gingival
tissue over the immediate implant only and immediate implant with connective tissue in
patients with single non-restorable tooth in the esthetic zone. The main null hypothesis to
be tested is that the addition of SCTG to immediately placed implants will not significantly
differ from immediately placed implant alone as regard gingival tissue stability.
Description:
Implant became a treatment modality for replacing missing or non-restorable teeth, providing
clinical success rate and esthetic outcome. (1) In esthetic zone the main goal is not only
the preservation of function but also the preservation of the esthetics. The esthetic outcome
of implant supported restoration depend on the soft tissue volume and the soft tissue
contour. (2) The placement of immediate implant after tooth extraction was proved as a very
high success rate treatment modality. It provided several advantages such as reduction of the
time between tooth extraction and the placement of prosthesis, reduction of the number of
surgical treatments (3) and increase osteointegration between bone and implant surface (4).
Considering the survival rate of immediate implantation versus delayed implantation there is
no significant difference with an overall success rate of 99.6%, it is just considered as a
successful treatment modality, based on 802 implants (5).
On the other hand disadvantage related to esthetic outcome has been reported, showing facial
gingival recession following the first year of function due to labial bone plate resorption.
(6, 2).
A systematic review by Sanz et al.,(2012) compared the reduction of bone height and bone
width between two groups the control group was delayed implant placement and the studied
group was immediate implant placement and the mean difference between groups was of 13.11%
(95% CI: from 3.83 to 22.4; P = 0.057) and 19.85% (95% CI: from 13.85 to 25.81)respectively,
concluding that the early placement of dental implants after tooth extraction offers
advantages in terms of soft and hard tissue preservation, compared with delayed implant
placement , which affect the aesthetic (7 ) As a sequence of dimensional ridge alterations
that occur following tooth extraction many studies reported a recession of marginal
peri-implant mucosa, which affect the aesthetic outcome (8, 9, and 10).
A study made by Migliorati et al., (2015) between two groups, the control group (immediate
loading implant treated without raising a flap) and the test group (immediate loaded implant
treated with sub-epithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) using the tunnel technique in the
labial area) Both groups (47 implants) received deproteinized bovine bone minerals and
implants were successfully integrated with a follow up period 2-year examination . Moreover
the mean recession in the control group was 0.71mm (17.58%), one third of the control group
reported recession >1mm, and mean pink aesthetic score (PES) was 6.65, resulting in bad
aesthetic. The test group showed an increase of the keratinized mucosa (KM) with a mean of
34.29% (0.5mm) and a mean recession of 0.2mm (10.01%), only one case (4%) showed recession
>1mm and the mean PES was 8. The thickening of soft tissue by the addition of SCTG, lead to
compensation and maintenance of the loss of bone volume in the labial area (11).
The addition of sub epithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) to the immediate implant was
suggested for facial gingival biotype conversation. It was proved to be successful in
preserving soft tissue levels. (12)
A systematic review was made to investigate if the addition of SCTG overcome the disadvantage
of placement of immediate implant only or not, but unfortunately the included studies had
different techniques and the number of the patients in those studies was few thus further RCT
was necessary (13).