CF41102 5-year Clinical Evaluation of Conelog® Implant With 7 mm Length

NCT ID: NCT03558347

Last Updated: 2020-03-17

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

20 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2012-03-01

Study Completion Date

2021-09-27

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The objective of this prospective, randomized, pilot study is to determine whether the Conelog® connection is suitable for splinted/non-splinted cemented crowns in the chewing centre (focus only on implant-abutment connection) and whether implants with the Conelog® connection and a length of 7mm are suitable for use in the molar region of the lower jaw.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

In order to avoid sinus augmentation in the upper jaw and a vertical augmentation in the lower jaw, various manufacturers offer short implants of 6-8mm length. The prevention of augmentative measures, especially in the mandible, is a fundamental component of the minimization of invasiveness while at the same time improving the functional capability. The benefit lies in the possibility to place implants without prior bone augmentation even in difficult anatomical conditions. This significantly reduces the invasiveness which on the one hand allows a higher number of patients to be treated with implants (especially morbid patients and anxiety patients) and on the other hand makes the treatment more predictable, with less risk, cost-efficient and considerably faster. Moreover, new scientific insights are gained in the area of short implants.

As with all implants, the risks associated with the study consist of intraoperative complications (e.g. damage of adjacent structures), failure of the implant (e.g. impairment of wound healing, fracture of the implant body), the abutment or abutment screw (e.g. loosening, fracture), or the crown on the abutment (veneer fracture, scaffold fracture).

The objective is to determine whether implants with the Conelog® connection and a length of 7mm are suitable for splinted/non-splinted monolithic lithium disilicate crowns cemented on individualized titanium abutments in the chewing centre of the mandible. The main indication for short implants is severe atrophy of the jaw, which creates a longer distance from the implant shoulder to the occlusal plane. An unfavourable crown-to-implant ratio means higher stress on the screws, the implant-abutment surface and possibly on the osseointegration of the implants. This raises the question whether splinted crowns have a positive effect on implant survival compared to non-splinted crowns.

The two 7mm Conelog ® implants are either used in the area of the second premolar and the first molar or the first and second molars of the mandible. The diameter of the implant depends on the width of the alveolar bone and ranges from 3.8 to 4.3 mm.

In case of a bilateral free-end situation, both quadrants are treated as part of the study, and both treatment variants are applied by using splinted crowns on one side and individual crowns on the other (split mouth design).

20 patients will be included in the study, which will be divided into two equally sized groups of 10 patients. All patients are recruited by the three clinical investigators at the Department of Prosthodontics and Biomaterials, Centre for Implantology, Medical Faculty, Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule Aachen (RWTH) Aachen University Hospital. In order to achieve sufficient patient numbers, the population of Aachen will be informed via print media.

Each patient receives a single dose of antibiotics one hour prior to implant surgery. A mucoperiosteal flap was mobilized and the implants were placed as recommended by the manufacturer, using a surgical template as a guide. Healing abutments were screwed, and submerged healing is used for all implants. Second stage surgery is performed after 3 months. The prosthetic restoration is completed within 4 weeks after exposure.

Patients in group A will receive splinted monolithic lithium disilicate crowns cemented on individualized titanium abutments. Patients in group B will receive 2 non-splinted monolithic lithium disilicate-crowns cemented on individualized titanium abutments.

The cementation is done with Multilink Implant ® on the machined abutments, which have been cleaned for 5 minutes in an ultrasonic cleaner with 95% alcohol. The crowns are conditioned with hydrofluoric acid for 20 seconds and silanized with Monobond Plus® for 60 seconds. The day of insertion of the restoration is marked as baseline.

The examination performed at baseline and the follow up after 6 months includes occlusion, probing depth, plaque index and the condition of the ceramic surface of the crowns. Additionally, radiographs with customized positioning jigs are taken at baseline, after 1, 3, and 5 years.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Dental Implants Partial Edentulism

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

This study consists of 20 patients (15 female, 5 male, mean age 59) who, after implant placement and second stage surgery, are randomly divided into two groups: group A was treated with two splinted crowns, group B with non-splinted single crowns. Four patients with bilateral free-end situation received both splinted and non-splinted restorations.
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

short implants with splinted crowns

Patients of that group received splinted crowns on the two adjacent implants Intervention: short implants with splinted crowns

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

short implants with splinted crowns

Intervention Type DEVICE

7 mm short implants (CONELOG® Implant System), individualized titanium abutments, splinted lithium disilicate crowns

short implants with non-splinted crowns

Patients of that group received single crowns on the two adjacent implants Intervention: short implants with non-splinted crowns

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

short implants with non-splinted crowns

Intervention Type DEVICE

7 mm short implants (CONELOG® Implant System), individualized titanium abutments, non-splinted lithium disilicate crowns

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

short implants with splinted crowns

7 mm short implants (CONELOG® Implant System), individualized titanium abutments, splinted lithium disilicate crowns

Intervention Type DEVICE

short implants with non-splinted crowns

7 mm short implants (CONELOG® Implant System), individualized titanium abutments, non-splinted lithium disilicate crowns

Intervention Type DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

CONELOG® Implant System CONELOG® Implant System

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* female and male subjects older than 18 years
* absence of all molars and, optionally, the second premolar in at least on quadrant of the lower jaw
* the periodontal situation of the other teeth is healthy or periodontal treatment has already been successfully performed
* the antagonists are natural teeth or treated with fixed dentures
* good health according to the ASA Physical Status Classification System one or two (ASA 2010)
* good oral hygiene and an at most moderate tobacco consumption
* bone height above the N. alveolaris inferior of at least 11mm and the precondition of a one-stage implantation and augmentation
* signed consent

Exclusion Criteria

* Indication for large augmentations of the jaw bone
* Bone abundance with minimal risk of injury to neighbouring structures when using two 11 mm or longer implants
* Psychological disorder
* substance abuse
* removable dentures (with or without implants)
* pregnancy
* patients under age or unable to reason
* persons who are placed in an institution on a judicial or administrative order
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Camlog Oral Reconstruction Foundation

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

RWTH Aachen University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Stefan Wolfart, Prof. Dr.

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

University Hospital, Aachen

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Universitätsklinikum Aachen

Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Germany

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Tawil G, Aboujaoude N, Younan R. Influence of prosthetic parameters on the survival and complication rates of short implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006 Mar-Apr;21(2):275-82.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16634499 (View on PubMed)

Misch CE. Short dental implants: a literature review and rationale for use. Dent Today. 2005 Aug;24(8):64-6, 68.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16161821 (View on PubMed)

Vehemente VA, Chuang SK, Daher S, Muftu A, Dodson TB. Risk factors affecting dental implant survival. J Oral Implantol. 2002;28(2):74-81. doi: 10.1563/1548-1336(2002)0282.3.CO;2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12498449 (View on PubMed)

Gentile MA, Chuang SK, Dodson TB. Survival estimates and risk factors for failure with 6 x 5.7-mm implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2005 Nov-Dec;20(6):930-7.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16392351 (View on PubMed)

Urdaneta RA, Rodriguez S, McNeil DC, Weed M, Chuang SK. The effect of increased crown-to-implant ratio on single-tooth locking-taper implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010 Jul-Aug;25(4):729-43.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20657868 (View on PubMed)

Li R, Sun W, Shi B. [Retrospective analysis of placing short dental implants in the posterior areas]. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2010 Dec;45(12):708-11. Chinese.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21211233 (View on PubMed)

Yi YS, Emanuel KM, Chuang SK. Short (5.0 x 5.0 mm) implant placements and restoration with integrated abutment crowns. Implant Dent. 2011 Apr;20(2):125-30. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e31820fb67e.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21448021 (View on PubMed)

Etoz OA, Ulu M, Kesim B. Treatment of patient with Papillon-Lefevre syndrome with short dental implants: a case report. Implant Dent. 2010 Oct;19(5):394-9. doi: 10.1097/ID.0b013e3181ed0798.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20881810 (View on PubMed)

Ogawa T, Dhaliwal S, Naert I, Mine A, Kronstrom M, Sasaki K, Duyck J. Effect of tilted and short distal implants on axial forces and bending moments in implants supporting fixed dental prostheses: an in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont. 2010 Nov-Dec;23(6):566-73.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21209995 (View on PubMed)

Wu H, Li JH, DI P, Qiu LX, Lin Y, Luo J. [A long-term retrospective clinical study of short dental implant restoration]. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2010 Dec;45(12):712-6. Chinese.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21211234 (View on PubMed)

De Santis D, Cucchi A, Longhi C, Vincenzo B. Short threaded implants with an oxidized surface to restore posterior teeth: 1- to 3-year results of a prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011 Mar-Apr;26(2):393-403.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21483893 (View on PubMed)

Neldam CA, Pinholt EM. State of the art of short dental implants: a systematic review of the literature. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 Aug;14(4):622-32. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00303.x. Epub 2010 Oct 26.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20977606 (View on PubMed)

Raviv E, Turcotte A, Harel-Raviv M. Short dental implants in reduced alveolar bone height. Quintessence Int. 2010 Jul-Aug;41(7):575-9.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20614044 (View on PubMed)

Hasan I, Heinemann F, Aitlahrach M, Bourauel C. Biomechanical finite element analysis of small diameter and short dental implant. Biomed Tech (Berl). 2010 Dec;55(6):341-50. doi: 10.1515/BMT.2010.049. Epub 2010 Oct 28.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21028950 (View on PubMed)

Al-Sawaf O, Tuna T, Rittich A, Kern T, Wolfart S. Randomized clinical trial evaluating the effect of splinting crowns on short implants in the mandible 3 years after loading. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020 Nov;31(11):1061-1071. doi: 10.1111/clr.13652. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 33463774 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

UKA 360569

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.