Evaluation of Short Implants' Success for Teeth Replacement in Atrophic Posterior Mandibular Ridge
NCT ID: NCT04414709
Last Updated: 2020-06-04
Study Results
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.
COMPLETED
NA
16 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-04-14
2020-02-20
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Autogenous Bone Ring Versus Split Bone Block for Management of Posterior Atrophic Mandible
NCT07140887
Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using Autogenous Tooth Graft Versus Autogenous Demineralized Dentin Graft.
NCT03447795
Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Three Different Modalities for Management of Distal Extension Atrophied Mandibular Ridge: A One Year Prospective Study
NCT05978115
Evaluation of a Combined Ridge Expansion Technique With Simultaneous Dental Implant Placement
NCT05685576
Osseodensification Versus Motor-Driven Expanders' Techniques for Increasing Bone Density With Simultaneous Implant Placement
NCT04609475
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Two short implants
DENTIUM superline implant fixture is characterized by sandblasted with large grits and acid etched surface treatment (S.L.A). SLA surface allows good bone-implant contact with good clinical performance, maintaining crestal bone margin. Short Implants of 7.0 mm length and 4.5 mm diameter are to be used. The Short Implants are characterized by 1.5mm supra-bony smooth collar, and 5.5mm infra-bony surface treated double threaded titanium.
Double short implant
Patients receives 2 short implants to restore missing posterior teeth, loaded with splinted screw retained crowns.
Single short implant
DENTIUM superline implant fixture is characterized by sandblasted with large grits and acid etched surface treatment (S.L.A). SLA surface allows good bone-implant contact with good clinical performance, maintaining crestal bone margin. Short Implants of 7.0 mm length and 4.5 mm diameter are to be used. The Short Implants are characterized by 1.5mm supra-bony smooth collar, and 5.5mm infra-bony surface treated double threaded titanium.
Single short implant
Patients receives single short implants, loaded with single screw retained crowns.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Double short implant
Patients receives 2 short implants to restore missing posterior teeth, loaded with splinted screw retained crowns.
Single short implant
Patients receives single short implants, loaded with single screw retained crowns.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Residual alveolar ridge at 6-8 mm height and at least 7mm width.
* Healthy band of keratinized attached mucosa.
* Good Oral hygiene.
* Medically fit patient, free from relevant diseases.
Exclusion Criteria
* Imunnocompromised patients
* Patients with Para-functional habits.
* Smokers
* Poor Oral hygiene.
* Patient refuse to undergo the surgery.
30 Years
60 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Alexandria University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
fady michel tadros hanna
Oral Surgery Master's student
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University
Alexandria, , Egypt
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Glantz PO, Nilner K. Biomechanical aspects of prosthetic implant-borne reconstructions. Periodontol 2000. 1998 Jun;17:119-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0757.1998.tb00129.x. No abstract available.
Renouard F, Nisand D. Short implants in the severely resorbed maxilla: a 2-year retrospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2005;7 Suppl 1:S104-10. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2005.tb00082.x.
Tallgren A. The reduction in face height of edentulous and partially edentulous subjects during long-term denture wear. A longitudinal roentgenographic cephalometric study. Acta Odontol Scand. 1966 Sep;24(2):195-239. doi: 10.3109/00016356609026127. No abstract available.
Nevins M, Al Hezaimi K, Schupbach P, Karimbux N, Kim DM. Vertical ridge augmentation using an equine bone and collagen block infused with recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor-BB: a randomized single-masked histologic study in non-human primates. J Periodontol. 2012 Jul;83(7):878-84. doi: 10.1902/jop.2012.110478. Epub 2012 Jan 5.
Chiapasco M, Casentini P, Zaniboni M. Bone augmentation procedures in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24 Suppl:237-59.
das Neves FD, Fones D, Bernardes SR, do Prado CJ, Neto AJ. Short implants--an analysis of longitudinal studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006 Jan-Feb;21(1):86-93.
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.
Thoma DS, Haas R, Tutak M, Garcia A, Schincaglia GP, Hammerle CH. Randomized controlled multicentre study comparing short dental implants (6 mm) versus longer dental implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus floor elevation procedures. Part 1: demographics and patient-reported outcomes at 1 year of loading. J Clin Periodontol. 2015 Jan;42(1):72-80. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12323. Epub 2014 Dec 26.
Lemos CA, Ferro-Alves ML, Okamoto R, Mendonca MR, Pellizzer EP. Short dental implants versus standard dental implants placed in the posterior jaws: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2016 Apr;47:8-17. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2016.01.005. Epub 2016 Jan 19.
Misch CE, Steignga J, Barboza E, Misch-Dietsh F, Cianciola LJ, Kazor C. Short dental implants in posterior partial edentulism: a multicenter retrospective 6-year case series study. J Periodontol. 2006 Aug;77(8):1340-7. doi: 10.1902/jop.2006.050402.
Menchero-Cantalejo E, Barona-Dorado C, Cantero-Alvarez M, Fernandez-Caliz F, Martinez-Gonzalez JM. Meta-analysis on the survival of short implants. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011 Jul 1;16(4):e546-51. doi: 10.4317/medoral.16.e546.
Lum LB. A biomechanical rationale for the use of short implants. J Oral Implantol. 1991;17(2):126-31.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IORG 0008839
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.