Dental Implant PlacementCTG_implantNCT03728283
Implant Placement in Combination With Connective Tissue Grafting
A study testing implant placement in combination with connective tissue grafting and Implant placement in people with Dental Implant Placement, run by Aristotle University Of Thessaloniki.
Trial summary
Suitable subjects who were in need of implant placement were randomised between two groups; Group-A (NA=23) received crestal implant placement. In Group-B (NB=23) a CTG harvested from the palate was stabilised over the implant-neck. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Dental Implant Placement
- What is being tested?
- implant placement in combination with connective tissue grafting and Implant placement
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 46 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 10 Jan 2014to 30 Jul 2016
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- above 18 years of age
- no active periodontal disease (Plaque Index ≤15%, Gingival Index ≤20%, <20% of sites equal to or deeper than 5mm).
Who cannot join
- medical conditions that contraindicated surgical implant placement,
- medication that interfered with bone metabolism,
- pregnancy or lactation,
- inadequate dimensions of the alveolar ridge or grafted bone at the surgical site,
- tooth extraction 3 months prior to the study.
About this study
Official title: Tissue Changes Following Connective Tissue Grafting and Two-stage Implant Placement. A Randomised Clinical Trial
Suitable subjects who were in need of implant placement were randomised between two groups; Group-A (NA=23) received crestal implant placement. In Group-B (NB=23) a CTG harvested from the palate was stabilised over the implant-neck. At the time of implant placement (T0), Groups were categorized as having thin mucosa ≤2.5mm at the surgical site, or thick mucosa >2.5mm. Mucosa thickness, width of keratinised tissue (WKT), crestal bone levels and bone thickness were determined at T0 and at the two-stage surgery (T1).
Read the detailed description
Initially, 48 patients were recruited from new referrals to the Lab of Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Implant Biology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTh) for surgical placement of at least one implant located in the upper/lower jaw in the anterior/posterior segment.
Study design An initial screening visit included full-mouth periodontal assessment, radiographic examination, fulfillment of inclusion/exclusion criteria and suitable patients (n=48) were randomised into either treatment Group; in the control Group (Group-A), a conventional surgical protocol was followed for implant placement, while in the test Group (Group-B) implants were placed in conjunction with an autologous CTG. Each Group was further categorized as having thin mucosa (≤2.5mm for Subgroups-AI/-BI) or thick mucosa (>2.5mm for Subgroups-AII/-BII) at the implantation site before implant placement (baseline=T0). Implants were exposed 3-4 months later (T1).
Surgical procedures A single implant system (Osseotite, Certain, parallel wall, Biomet 3i, Florida, USA; implants of 3.25/4.0 mm in diameter) was used in all cases. At T0, following local anaesthesia (lidocaine hydrochloride 2%, epinephrine 1:100000, Lignospan standard, Septodont, France), crestal incisions were performed and full-thickness flaps were raised for implant placement. Implants were placed at the level of the alveolar crest following the manufacturer's surgical guidelines and a two-stage protocol. Flaps were repositioned using absorbable sutures (polygalactic acid 5/0 sutures; PGA, medipac, Greece). In Group-B, a similar protocol was followed as in Group-A, with the exception that following implant placement a CTG was harvested from the palate, between the maxillary canine and the first molar (Liu \& Weisgold, 2002) and was stabilised onto the lingual flap using a horizontal mattress suture. Standardised dimensions of the CTG (11×6×1.5mm) were sought to cover the implant's shoulder and extend 3-5 mm on the buccal and the lingual aspect of the alveolar ridge (Fig. 1). Scoring of the periosteum for coronal advancement of the flaps was mainly performed in Group-B (16 of 23 cases).
Post-operative care Post-operative pain and oedema were controlled by Ibuprofen, 600 mg. All participants were prescribed antibiotics (Amoxicillin, 500 mg per 8 hours for 5 days) and were instructed to rinse twice daily with chlorhexidine digluconate (0.12%) and to abstain from oral hygiene in the test area for one week. Any post-operative adverse events (i.e. swelling, suppuration, flap dehiscence, persistent pain) were recorded upon suture removal ten days after surgery.
Clinical assessments
The following clinical assessments were performed at the implant site at T0 and were repeated at T1:
A periodontal probe (Hu-Friedy XP-23/QW) that had an endo-stop attached on it was used to determine the distances which were finally measured in millimetres by a digital calliper (Mitutoyo Europe GmbH) for precision.
Mucosa thickness (mm) was measured by bone sounding on the alveolar crest and at 2- and 4 mm apically, both on the buccal and the lingual aspects.
The WKT (mm) was measured on the mid-buccal aspect of the implant site. The Implant to Bone Crest (I-BC) distance (mm) was measured at four sites, mid-buccally, mid-lingually, mesially and distally and was determined as the distance of the osseous crest from the implant platform.
The Thickness of the buccal and lingual bone (mm) was measured at the level of the implant shoulder and at 3- and 6 mm apically, using a customised metallic calliper (Ustomed, Tuttlingen, Germany). The inner part of one jaw firmly touched the periphery of the screw hole within the implant fixture and the opposing jaw firmly touched the osseous surface of the alveolar ridge at the predetermined depth.
Radiographic assessment Intraoral digital radiography and the VixWin™ Platinum Gendex software (Hatfield, PA, USA) was utilised to linearly assess the I-BC distance on the mesial/distal aspect at T0 and T1. The long-cone paralleling technique was used at a distance of 10 cm between the x-ray head and the digital sensor which was attached to a custom-made silicone bite block for reproducible radiographs.
- Conditions
- Dental Implant Placement
- Being tested
- implant placement in combination with connective tissue grafting, Implant placement
- Keywords
- connective tissue graft, implant surgery, two-stage implants, mucosa thickness, crestal bone
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
implant placement in combination with connective tissue graftingProcedure or surgery
A connective tissue graft of standardised dimensions was harvested from the palate under local anaesthesia and was stabilised over the implant's neck
Implant placementOther
Implants were placed following teh manufacturer's instructions
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Implant placement | Active comparator | conventional implant placement following the manufacturer's instructions Receives: Other: Implant placement |
| Implant and Connective tissue grafting | Experimental | implant placement in combination with connective tissue grafting Receives: Procedure: implant placement in combination with connective tissue grafting |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Mucosa thickness
measured by bone sounding on the alveolar crest and at 2- and 4 mm apically, both on the buccal and the lingual aspects
Measured: implant placement to implant exposure
Secondary outcomes (4)
Width of keratinised mucosa
measured on the mid-buccal aspect of the implant site
Measured: Implant placement to implant exposure
Implant to Bone Crest (I-BC) distance
measured at four sites, mid-buccally, mid-lingually, mesially and distally and was determined as the distance of the osseous crest from the implant platform.
Measured: Implant placement to implant exposure
Thickness of the buccal and lingual bone
measured at the level of the implant shoulder and at 3- and 6 mm apically, using a customised metallic calliper (Ustomed, Tuttlingen, Germany). The inner part of one jaw firmly touched the periphery of the screw hole within the implant fixture and the opposing jaw firmly touched the osseous surface of the alveolar ridge at the predetermined depth.
Measured: Implant placement to implant exposure
radiographic Implant to Bone Crest (I-BC) distance
Intraoral digital radiography and the VixWin™ Platinum Gendex software (Hatfield, PA, USA) was utilised to linearly assess the I-BC distance on the mesial/distal aspect at T0 and T1. The long-cone paralleling technique was used at a distance of 10 cm between the x-ray head and the digital sensor which was attached to a custom-made silicone bite block for reproducible radiographs.
Measured: Implant placement to implant exposure
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Nov 2018
- Study start10 Jan 2014
- Primary completion30 Apr 2016
- Study completion30 Jul 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Dental Implant PlacementStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Aristotle University Of ThessalonikiThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Prospective, randomised, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial (Altman et al. 2001) with allocation ratio 1:1,
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 46 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Aristotle University Of Thessaloniki
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Danae A. Apatzidou, Aristotle University Of Thessaloniki
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03728283
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- AUTh_5/30-09-2014
- Acronym
- CTG_implant
- Status last verified
- Nov 2018
- First submitted
- 31 Oct 2018
- Last updated
- 5 Nov 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Liu CL, Weisgold AS. Connective tissue graft: a classification for incision design from the palatal site and clinical case reports. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2002 Aug;22(4):373-9.
PubMed 12212684Papapetros D, Karagiannis V, Konstantinidis A, Apatzidou DA. Interim tissue changes following connective tissue grafting and two-stage implant placement. A randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2019 Sep;46(9):958-968. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13159. Epub 2019 Jul 24.
PubMed 31206749
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Nov 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Tissue Changes Following Connective Tissue Grafting and Two-stage Implant Placement. A Randomised Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03728283
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CTG_implant / AUTh_5/30-09-2014
- Conditions
- Dental Implant Placement
- Keywords
- connective tissue graft, implant surgery, two-stage implants, mucosa thickness, crestal bone
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 46 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Aristotle University Of ThessalonikiUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 10 Jan 2014 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Apr 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jul 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 Nov 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Suitable subjects who were in need of implant placement were randomised between two groups; Group-A (NA=23) received crestal implant placement. In Group-B (NB=23) a CTG harvested from the palate was stabilised over the implant-neck. At the time of implant placement (T0), Groups were categorized as having thin mucosa ≤2.5mm at the surgical site, or thick mucosa >2.5mm. Mucosa thickness, width of keratinised tissue (WKT), crestal bone levels and bone thickness were determined at T0 and at the two-stage surgery (T1).
Detailed description
Initially, 48 patients were recruited from new referrals to the Lab of Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Implant Biology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (AUTh) for surgical placement of at least one implant located in the upper/lower jaw in the anterior/posterior segment.
Study design An initial screening visit included full-mouth periodontal assessment, radiographic examination, fulfillment of inclusion/exclusion criteria and suitable patients (n=48) were randomised into either treatment Group; in the control Group (Group-A), a conventional surgical protocol was followed for implant placement, while in the test Group (Group-B) implants were placed in conjunction with an autologous CTG. Each Group was further categorized as having thin mucosa (≤2.5mm for Subgroups-AI/-BI) or thick mucosa (>2.5mm for Subgroups-AII/-BII) at the implantation site before implant placement (baseline=T0). Implants were exposed 3-4 months later (T1).
Surgical procedures A single implant system (Osseotite, Certain, parallel wall, Biomet 3i, Florida, USA; implants of 3.25/4.0 mm in diameter) was used in all cases. At T0, following local anaesthesia (lidocaine hydrochloride 2%, epinephrine 1:100000, Lignospan standard, Septodont, France), crestal incisions were performed and full-thickness flaps were raised for implant placement. Implants were placed at the level of the alveolar crest following the manufacturer's surgical guidelines and a two-stage protocol. Flaps were repositioned using absorbable sutures (polygalactic acid 5/0 sutures; PGA, medipac, Greece). In Group-B, a similar protocol was followed as in Group-A, with the exception that following implant placement a CTG was harvested from the palate, between the maxillary canine and the first molar (Liu \& Weisgold, 2002) and was stabilised onto the lingual flap using a horizontal mattress suture. Standardised dimensions of the CTG (11×6×1.5mm) were sought to cover the implant's shoulder and extend 3-5 mm on the buccal and the lingual aspect of the alveolar ridge (Fig. 1). Scoring of the periosteum for coronal advancement of the flaps was mainly performed in Group-B (16 of 23 cases).
Post-operative care Post-operative pain and oedema were controlled by Ibuprofen, 600 mg. All participants were prescribed antibiotics (Amoxicillin, 500 mg per 8 hours for 5 days) and were instructed to rinse twice daily with chlorhexidine digluconate (0.12%) and to abstain from oral hygiene in the test area for one week. Any post-operative adverse events (i.e. swelling, suppuration, flap dehiscence, persistent pain) were recorded upon suture removal ten days after surgery.
Clinical assessments
The following clinical assessments were performed at the implant site at T0 and were repeated at T1:
A periodontal probe (Hu-Friedy XP-23/QW) that had an endo-stop attached on it was used to determine the distances which were finally measured in millimetres by a digital calliper (Mitutoyo Europe GmbH) for precision.
Mucosa thickness (mm) was measured by bone sounding on the alveolar crest and at 2- and 4 mm apically, both on the buccal and the lingual aspects.
The WKT (mm) was measured on the mid-buccal aspect of the implant site. The Implant to Bone Crest (I-BC) distance (mm) was measured at four sites, mid-buccally, mid-lingually, mesially and distally and was determined as the distance of the osseous crest from the implant platform.
The Thickness of the buccal and lingual bone (mm) was measured at the level of the implant shoulder and at 3- and 6 mm apically, using a customised metallic calliper (Ustomed, Tuttlingen, Germany). The inner part of one jaw firmly touched the periphery of the screw hole within the implant fixture and the opposing jaw firmly touched the osseous surface of the alveolar ridge at the predetermined depth.
Radiographic assessment Intraoral digital radiography and the VixWin™ Platinum Gendex software (Hatfield, PA, USA) was utilised to linearly assess the I-BC distance on the mesial/distal aspect at T0 and T1. The long-cone paralleling technique was used at a distance of 10 cm between the x-ray head and the digital sensor which was attached to a custom-made silicone bite block for reproducible radiographs.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Prospective, randomised, parallel-group, controlled clinical trial (Altman et al. 2001) with allocation ratio 1:1,
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Implant placement | Active comparator | Other: Implant placementconventional implant placement following the manufacturer's instructions |
| Implant and Connective tissue grafting | Experimental | Procedure: implant placement in combination with connective tissue graftingimplant placement in combination with connective tissue grafting |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- above 18 years of age
- no active periodontal disease (Plaque Index ≤15%, Gingival Index ≤20%, <20% of sites equal to or deeper than 5mm).
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- medical conditions that contraindicated surgical implant placement,
- medication that interfered with bone metabolism,
- pregnancy or lactation,
- inadequate dimensions of the alveolar ridge or grafted bone at the surgical site,
- tooth extraction 3 months prior to the study.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| implant placement in combination with connective tissue graftingA connective tissue graft of standardised dimensions was harvested from the palate under local anaesthesia and was stabilised over the implant's neck | Procedure or surgery | Implant and Connective tissue grafting |
| Implant placementImplants were placed following teh manufacturer's instructions | Other | Conventional Implant placement |
Primary outcome
Mucosa thickness
Time frame: implant placement to implant exposure
measured by bone sounding on the alveolar crest and at 2- and 4 mm apically, both on the buccal and the lingual aspects
4 secondary outcomes
Width of keratinised mucosa
Time frame: Implant placement to implant exposure
Implant to Bone Crest (I-BC) distance
Time frame: Implant placement to implant exposure
Thickness of the buccal and lingual bone
Time frame: Implant placement to implant exposure
radiographic Implant to Bone Crest (I-BC) distance
Time frame: Implant placement to implant exposure
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Nov 2018.
- Results publication: PubMed 12212684Liu CL, Weisgold AS. Connective tissue graft: a classification for incision design from the palatal site and clinical case reports. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2002 Aug;22(4):373-9.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 31206749Papapetros D, Karagiannis V, Konstantinidis A, Apatzidou DA. Interim tissue changes following connective tissue grafting and two-stage implant placement. A randomized clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2019 Sep;46(9):958-968. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13159. Epub 2019 Jul 24.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Dental Implant Placement
Not yet recruiting
Free Soft Tissue Grafts (FSTG) Using Autograft Palatal Donor Tissue vs. Xenograft Collagen Matrix (Zderm™)
Gingival Recession Localized Moderate, Dental Implant
Not yet recruiting
Safety Assessment of Placing a Single Dental Implant Without Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Simple Cases: A Pilot Study
Tooth Loss and Rehabillitation, Dental Implant Failure
RecruitingObservational study
Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Dentsply Sirona PrimeTaper Implants
Dental Implants
Active, not recruiting
The Aim of the Study Will be Clinically and Radio Graphically Comparison of Two Implant Designs Used to Treat Atrophied Mandible . Implant Design Comparison Will Done for Implant Stability,Peri-implant Soft Tissue Health Changes and Bone Changes .Patients Will be Divided Randomly Into Two Group
Dental Implant Bone Loss, Peri-Implant Health
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Ascorbic Acid-Loaded I-PRF With Partially Demineralized Dentin Graft on Alveolar Ridge Preservation
Alveolar Ridge Preservation Post-Extraction Bone Healing Dental Implant Site Development Tooth Loss, Alveolar Bone Regeneration Following Odontectomy
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing implant placement in combination with connective tissue grafting and Implant placement in people with Dental Implant Placement, run by Aristotle University Of Thessaloniki.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Nov 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Mucosa thickness (time frame: implant placement to implant exposure). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03728283, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 5 Nov 2018.