Comparison of Three Transmucosal Augmentation Techniques in Immediate Implant Placement

NCT ID: NCT06820489

Last Updated: 2026-01-09

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

RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

54 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2025-04-01

Study Completion Date

2031-11-01

Brief Summary

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

Patients undergoing single immediate implant placement (IIP) in the premaxilla will be invited to participate in this randomized controlled trial (RCT). Prior to surgery, a small- field low-dose cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is taken to verify the integrity of the facial bone wall and an adequate amount of apical and palatal bone availability for implant anchorage. 54 patients will be randomly assigned to either conventional connective tissue graft (C-CTG), scarf tissue graft (S-CTG) or dual zonde conept (DZ). Sealed envelopes are prepared for that purpose, of which 18 are internally labeled as C-CTG, 18 as S-CTG and 18 as DZ. Following IIP, a sealed envelope will be opened to reveal the treatment concept.

Successful regeneration (primary outcome) is achieved when the combination of socket grafting and transmucosal augmentation (C-CTG or S-CTG or DZ) would be able to counteract any buccal soft tissue loss at level -1 mm. It is assessed on the basis of superimposed CBCTs taken pre-operatively and at one-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes include: horizontal buccal bone loss, vertical buccal bone loss, increase in buccal soft tissue thickness, patient-reported outcomes, plaque, bleeding on probing, probing depth, marginal bone loss, change in buccal soft tissue profile, midfacial soft tissue level, mesial and distal papilla level, Pink Esthetic Score.

Detailed Description

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

This study is a three-arm randomized controlled trial comparing conventional connective tissue grafting (C-CTG) with two alternative soft-tissue augmentation approaches-scarf CTG (S-CTG) and the dual-zone technique (DZ)-in patients receiving single immediate implant placement in the anterior maxilla. The primary objective is to determine which method results in the highest proportion of sites showing successful regeneration 1 mm below the implant shoulder. Secondary outcomes assess clinical parameters, patient-reported pain and medication use, hard- and soft-tissue dimensional changes, and esthetic scores.

Eligible participants are adults with good oral hygiene and an anterior maxillary tooth requiring extraction with adequate bone support. Exclusion criteria include pregnancy, systemic disease, smoking, active infection, periodontal disease, and extensive gingival asymmetry. Fifty-four patients will be randomized equally to the three intervention groups; allocation is concealed and outcome assessors are blinded.

All patients receive immediate implant placement with socket grafting. The three groups differ only in the soft-tissue augmentation method: C-CTG involves placing a connective tissue graft in a buccal pouch; S-CTG uses a smaller graft fixed at the transmucosal aspect without a pouch; DZ relies on graft condensation beneath the soft tissue without a connective tissue graft. Standard postoperative care is provided in all groups.

Hard- and soft-tissue changes are assessed using cone-beam CT, clinical measurements, intra-oral scans, and standardized photography at baseline and follow-up visits. Successful regeneration is defined by maintenance of buccal soft tissue at the specified reference level. Patient-reported postoperative pain and analgesic use are recorded after one week. Esthetic outcomes are evaluated using a validated scoring system at 1- and 5-year follow-up.

Data will be analyzed using appropriate statistical tests for group comparisons, including mixed models for tissue changes, Fisher's exact test for the primary outcome, and non-parametric tests for variables that are not normally distributed. A two-sided significance level of 5% is applied throughout.

Conditions

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

Bone Resorption

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

Randomized controlled trial
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Investigators Outcome Assessors
As this RCT concerns a surgical intervention, patients and treating clinicians can not be masked.

Study Groups

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

Conventional connective tissue graft

Connective tissue graft immediately inserted in buccal pouch

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Conventional connective tissue graft after immediate implant placement

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

A pouch is made in the buccal mucosa extending 3 mm below the buccal bone crest. Thereupon, a free gingival graft is harvested from the palatal mucosa and de-epithelialized. The CTG is brought into the pouch and fixed with two single sutures onto the buccal mucosa. A healing abutment is installed, which is replaced by a provisional implant crown 2 days later. Sutures are removed 1 week after the surgery.

Scarf connective tissue graft

Connective tissue graft immediately fixed onto the buccal mucosa.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Scarf connective tissue graft after immediate implant placement

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

No pouch is made in the recipient site. A free gingival graft is harvested from the palatal mucosa and de-epithelialized. The small CTG is fixed at the transmucosal aspect onto the buccal mucosa. A healing abutment is installed, which is replaced by a provisional implant crown 2 days later. Sutures are removed 1 week after the surgery.

Dual zone concept

Bone material condensed up to the buccal soft tissue margin.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Dual zone concept after immediate implant placement

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

DBBM is applied and condensed up to the level of the buccal soft tissue margin. A healing abutment is installed, which is replaced by a provisional implant crown 2 days later. Usually, sutures are not needed in this group, unless minimal papilla opening was required to extract the tooth. In that case, sutures will be removed after 1 week.

Interventions

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

Conventional connective tissue graft after immediate implant placement

A pouch is made in the buccal mucosa extending 3 mm below the buccal bone crest. Thereupon, a free gingival graft is harvested from the palatal mucosa and de-epithelialized. The CTG is brought into the pouch and fixed with two single sutures onto the buccal mucosa. A healing abutment is installed, which is replaced by a provisional implant crown 2 days later. Sutures are removed 1 week after the surgery.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Scarf connective tissue graft after immediate implant placement

No pouch is made in the recipient site. A free gingival graft is harvested from the palatal mucosa and de-epithelialized. The small CTG is fixed at the transmucosal aspect onto the buccal mucosa. A healing abutment is installed, which is replaced by a provisional implant crown 2 days later. Sutures are removed 1 week after the surgery.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Dual zone concept after immediate implant placement

DBBM is applied and condensed up to the level of the buccal soft tissue margin. A healing abutment is installed, which is replaced by a provisional implant crown 2 days later. Usually, sutures are not needed in this group, unless minimal papilla opening was required to extract the tooth. In that case, sutures will be removed after 1 week.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* At least 20 years old
* Good oral hygiene defined as full-mouth plaque score ≤ 25%
* Presence of an incisor, cuspid or premolar in the maxilla that needs to be extracted for any reason with at least one neighboring tooth present
* At least 3 mm bone available at the apical or palatal aspect of the alveolus as assessed on CBCT to ensure primary implant stability
* Intact buccal bone wall (type I) or limited buccal bone dehiscence (type IIa or IIb) at the time of extraction
* Written informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria

* Pregnancy
* Systemic diseases
* Smoking; suppuration
* \> 1 mm gingival asymmetry between the failing and contralateral tooth
* Untreated periodontal disease
* Untreated caries lesions.
Minimum Eligible Age

20 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

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

University Ghent

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

Locations

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

Ghent University Hospital

Ghent, East Flanders, Belgium

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

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

Belgium

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Véronique Christiaens, PhD

Role: CONTACT

09/332 40 17

Jan Cosyn, PhD

Role: CONTACT

09/332 40 18

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Véronique Christiaens, PhD

Role: primary

09/332 40 17

References

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

Chu SJ, Salama MA, Salama H, Garber DA, Saito H, Sarnachiaro GO, Tarnow DP. The dual-zone therapeutic concept of managing immediate implant placement and provisional restoration in anterior extraction sockets. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2012 Jul-Aug;33(7):524-32, 534.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 22908601 (View on PubMed)

Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Lindhe J. Hard-tissue alterations following immediate implant placement in extraction sites. J Clin Periodontol. 2004 Oct;31(10):820-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00565.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15367183 (View on PubMed)

Zuiderveld EG, van Nimwegen WG, Meijer HJA, Jung RE, Muhlemann S, Vissink A, Raghoebar GM. Effect of connective tissue grafting on buccal bone changes based on cone beam computed tomography scans in the esthetic zone of single immediate implants: A 1-year randomized controlled trial. J Periodontol. 2021 Apr;92(4):553-561. doi: 10.1002/JPER.20-0217. Epub 2020 Sep 11.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 32918332 (View on PubMed)

Wanis RW, Hosny MM, ElNahass H. Clinical evaluation of the buccal aspect around immediate implant using dual zone therapeutic concept versus buccal gap fill to bone level: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2022 Jun;24(3):307-319. doi: 10.1111/cid.13091. Epub 2022 May 4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 35507735 (View on PubMed)

Tonetti MS, Jung RE, Avila-Ortiz G, Blanco J, Cosyn J, Fickl S, Figuero E, Goldstein M, Graziani F, Madianos P, Molina A, Nart J, Salvi GE, Sanz-Martin I, Thoma D, Van Assche N, Vignoletti F. Management of the extraction socket and timing of implant placement: Consensus report and clinical recommendations of group 3 of the XV European Workshop in Periodontology. J Clin Periodontol. 2019 Jun;46 Suppl 21:183-194. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13131.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 31215112 (View on PubMed)

Slagter KW, Meijer HJA, Hentenaar DFM, Vissink A, Raghoebar GM. Immediate single-tooth implant placement with simultaneous bone augmentation versus delayed implant placement after alveolar ridge preservation in bony defect sites in the esthetic region: A 5-year randomized controlled trial. J Periodontol. 2021 Dec;92(12):1738-1748. doi: 10.1002/JPER.20-0845. Epub 2021 Apr 3.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 33724473 (View on PubMed)

Sicilia-Felechosa A, Pereira-Fernandez A, Garcia-Lareu J, Bernardo-Gonzalez J, Sicilia-Blanco P, Cuesta-Fernandez I. Flapless immediate implant placement and provisionalization in periodontal patients: A retrospective consecutive case-series study of single-tooth sites with dehiscence-type osseous defects. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020 Mar;31(3):229-238. doi: 10.1111/clr.13559. Epub 2020 Jan 20.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 31755601 (View on PubMed)

Seyssens L, Eghbali A, Cosyn J. A 10-year prospective study on single immediate implants. J Clin Periodontol. 2020 Oct;47(10):1248-1258. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13352. Epub 2020 Sep 2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 32748983 (View on PubMed)

Seyssens L, Eeckhout C, Cosyn J. Immediate implant placement with or without socket grafting: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2022 Jun;24(3):339-351. doi: 10.1111/cid.13079. Epub 2022 Mar 21.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 35313067 (View on PubMed)

Seyssens L, De Lat L, Cosyn J. Immediate implant placement with or without connective tissue graft: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2021 Feb;48(2):284-301. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13397. Epub 2020 Nov 20.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 33125754 (View on PubMed)

Raghoebar GM, Korfage A, Meijer HJA, Gareb B, Vissink A, Delli K. Linear and profilometric changes of the mucosa following soft tissue augmentation in the zone of aesthetic priority: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Oct;32 Suppl 21:138-156. doi: 10.1111/clr.13759.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 34642988 (View on PubMed)

O'Leary TJ, Drake RB, Naylor JE. The plaque control record. J Periodontol. 1972 Jan;43(1):38. doi: 10.1902/jop.1972.43.1.38. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 4500182 (View on PubMed)

Mareque S, Castelo-Baz P, Lopez-Malla J, Blanco J, Nart J, Valles C. Clinical and esthetic outcomes of immediate implant placement compared to alveolar ridge preservation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2021 Aug;25(8):4735-4748. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-03986-6. Epub 2021 Jun 7.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 34100157 (View on PubMed)

Kan JYK, Yin S, Rungcharassaeng K, Zucchelli G, Urban I, Lozada J. Facial implant gingival level and thickness changes following maxillary anterior immediate tooth replacement with scarf-connective tissue graft: A 4-13-year retrospective study. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2023 Jan;35(1):138-147. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12996. Epub 2022 Dec 13.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 36511151 (View on PubMed)

Griffin TJ, Cheung WS, Zavras AI, Damoulis PD. Postoperative complications following gingival augmentation procedures. J Periodontol. 2006 Dec;77(12):2070-9. doi: 10.1902/jop.2006.050296.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17209793 (View on PubMed)

Furhauser R, Florescu D, Benesch T, Haas R, Mailath G, Watzek G. Evaluation of soft tissue around single-tooth implant crowns: the pink esthetic score. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005 Dec;16(6):639-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01193.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16307569 (View on PubMed)

Fettouh AIA, Ghallab NA, Mina NA, Abdelmalak MS, Abdelrahman AAG, Shalaby AF, Shemais N. Hard and soft tissue alterations using dual-zone concept versus connective tissue graft at maxillary immediate implant placement: A 1-year randomized clinical and volumetric trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024 May;35(5):510-525. doi: 10.1111/clr.14247. Epub 2024 Feb 19.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 38372450 (View on PubMed)

Elaskary A, Ghallab N, Thabet A, Shemais N. The bone shielding versus dual-zone concept in treating thin-walled fresh extraction sockets with immediate implant placement: Soft and hard tissue changes. A randomized clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024 Feb;26(1):66-77. doi: 10.1111/cid.13275. Epub 2023 Sep 5.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 37669913 (View on PubMed)

Cosyn J, Struys T, Van Hove PJ, De Buyser S, De Bruyckere T. A Randomized Controlled Trial on the Timing of Soft-Tissue Augmentation in Immediate Implant Placement: Hard-Tissue Changes and Clinical Outcome. J Clin Periodontol. 2024 Nov;51(11):1534-1544. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.14060. Epub 2024 Sep 1.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 39218777 (View on PubMed)

Cosyn J, De Lat L, Seyssens L, Doornewaard R, Deschepper E, Vervaeke S. The effectiveness of immediate implant placement for single tooth replacement compared to delayed implant placement: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2019 Jun;46 Suppl 21:224-241. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13054.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 30624808 (View on PubMed)

Araujo MG, Sukekava F, Wennstrom JL, Lindhe J. Ridge alterations following implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: an experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 2005 Jun;32(6):645-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00726.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15882225 (View on PubMed)

Assaf JH, Assaf DD, Antoniazzi RP, Osorio LB, Franca FM. Correction of Buccal Dehiscence During Immediate Implant Placement Using the Flapless Technique: A Tomographic Evaluation. J Periodontol. 2017 Feb;88(2):173-180. doi: 10.1902/jop.2016.160276. Epub 2016 Sep 13.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27620655 (View on PubMed)

Related Links

Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.

https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/adjusting-covariates-randomized-clinical-trials-drugs-and-biological-products

FDA (2023) Adjusting for Covariates in Randomized Clinical Trials for Drugs and Biological Products. Guidance for Industry.

Other Identifiers

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

ONZ-2024-0529

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

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

Immediate Loading in Single Tooth Implants
NCT05409287 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA
Immediate Versus Late Placement
NCT04741607 RECRUITING NA
Connective Tissue Graft Versus Collagen Matrix
NCT04210596 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA