AzTrials
AzTrials

Implant Site ReactionNCT04230837

Marginal Bone Level Around Implants With Definitive Abutments

A study testing Inmediate abutment height in people with Implant Site Reaction, run by Universitat Internacional de Catalunya at 1 site in Spain.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the peri-implant crestal bone level around implants placed 1.5 mm subcrestally, with a 1 mm or 3 mm definitive abutment height at the time of implant placement after 1 year. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Implant Site Reaction
What is being tested?
Inmediate abutment height
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
69 participants
Where
1 siteSpain
Study dates
Jan 2017to Jul 2019
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 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Male or female ≥18 years old;
  • Controlled ASA1 or ASA2 patient;
  • Healthy periodontium or with controlled periodontal disease;
  • Need for rehabilitation with implants in partially posterior edentulous sextants;
  • Full Mouth Plaque Score (FMPS) less than 20% at the time of surgery;
  • Collaborating patients.
Show all 11Show fewer
  • According to the implant location:
  • Healed posterior sites, with a minimum of 2 months post-extraction;
  • Ridge width of 7 mm or more and of 10 mm of height to the mandibular nerve and 8 mm to the maxillary sinus;
  • Minimum keratinized mucosa (KM) width of 4 mm;
  • Antagonist dentition having a fixed restoration or natural teeth, (5) restorative space greater than 5 mm.

Who cannot join

  • Patients with endocrine, immunological or metabolic alterations;
  • Pregnancy, allergy to any metallic component of the implant;
  • Drug consumption or alcoholism;
  • Tobacco ≥10 cig/d and
  • Severe bruxism and TMJ pathology.
  • According to the implant location:
Show all 11Show fewer
  • Require regeneration techniques;
  • Width of KM less than 2 mm at any implant site;
  • Infections in the treatment area;
  • Absence of implant primary stability and
  • Being unable to perform prosthetically guided screw-retained restorations.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Spain1 site
  • Universitat Internacional de Catalunya

    Barcelona, 08195

Other trials in Spain

About this study

Official title: Marginal Bone Levels Around Implants With Definitive Abutments Of One and Three Millimeters: A One Year Of Follow Up Randomized Clinical Trial

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the peri-implant crestal bone level around implants placed 1.5 mm subcrestally, with a 1 mm or 3 mm definitive abutment height at the time of implant placement after 1 year. Patients were selected from the Department of Periodontology at Universitat Internacional de Catalunya. X-rays were taken at the time of implant placement, 8-12 weeks after placement, after screwing the provisional rehabilitation and at 12 months. An examiner indicated the crestal marginal bone level, the marginal bone level of the implant, and the marginal bone level of the abutment . The examiner, independent to the study, carried out the radiographic analysis using the Image J software on periapical radiographs.

Read the detailed description

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the peri-implant crestal bone level around implants placed 1.5 mm subcrestally with PS and a 1 mm or 3 mm definitive AH at the time of implant placement after 1 year.

  1. Study design This randomized controlled prospective study was carried out after its acceptance by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee with code number PER-ECL-2015-05, at the Faculty of Dentistry of the Universitat Internacional de Catalunya (UIC-Barcelona).
  2. Study population and selection criteria Patients were selected from the Department of Periodontology at Universitat Internacional de Catalunya. Once signed the informed consent, patients were screened following inclusion criteria.
  3. Randomization The randomization between the groups (Group A/Group B) was performed using OxMaR system (Oxford Minimization and Randomization) to determine the use of a 1 mm (Group A) or 3 mm (Group B) height abutments. The surgeon was unaware of the abutment height until after the insertion of the implant.
  4. Surgical and prosthetic treatment protocol Dental implants were placed by second and third year students of the Postgraduate Program in Periodontology at UIC-Barcelona, supervised by two experienced professors (MM, MA). Vega® implant, Klockner, several lengths (8, 10, 12 mm) and diameters (3.5, 4.0, 4.5 mm) were used depending on bone availability. The rehabilitation was carried out by students of the Postgraduate program of Esthetic and Prosthetic Dentistry at UIC-Barcelona, using the permanent prosthetic abutments with two different heights (1 or 3 mm) placed the day of surgery. The screwed-retained rehabilitations to the Permanent® abutment were single crowns or partial restorations (maximum of 3 crowns), both performed with CAD-CAM technology. Temporary restorations were placed between 2 to 4 months after surgery, for 4 weeks, before the placement of the definitive ones. Treatment sequence:
  • Preparation and implant surgery: a radiologic guide on a CBCT scan, and a standardized periapical radiograph were made for every patient. Pre-surgical instructions and medication such as antibiotic prophylaxis was made with 500 mg Amoxicillin every 8 h starting 1 hour prior to surgery, and 500mg/8h for 7 days. In allergic patients, Clindamycin 300 mg every 8 h, starting 1 day previously was used, and 300mg/8h/7days. The KM thickness was assessed before raising the mucoperiosteal flap. The placement of the implant was done following the manufacturing protocol and using a surgical guide according to the radiological guide previously used. IAll implants were placed 1.5 mm subcrestally from the most apical area of the crest, using a periodontal probe. At this time, the Permanent® abutment of 1 or 3 mm was chosen randomly and was placed at 35 Ncm. Postoperative anti-inflammatory medication (ibuprofen 600 mg, 1 tablet / 8 h / if pain) and 0.12% chlorhexidine rinse (2 times / day / 7 days) were advised. A standardized periapical radiograph was performed immediately after the implant placement. The amount of Keratinized gingiva (KG) was recorded and also the stability values of the implant by using the Penguin® device (RFA values) to the implant and on the Permanent abutment.
  • Prosthetic treatment: After 10 weeks up to 4 months, impressions were taken with fluid and heavy silicone (Zhermack® elite HD +) to make the provisional prosthesis, as long as the RFA values were greater than 65 ISQ. At the time of the temporary resin prosthesis placement, all the following clinical parameters (PD, mPI, mSBI, KG, BG, S, POI) were recorded and a periapical radiograph also taken. The definitive prosthesis was performed 4 weeks after the placement of the provisional. Records of clinical measures (BG, MT, mPII, mSBI, PD, KM) and periapical X-ray (periapical). clinical follow-up (MT, mPII, mSBI, PD), radiographic (periapical and orthopantomography) and RFA were evaluated 12 months later.
  1. Radiographic evaluation X-rays were taken at the time of implant placement, 8-12 weeks after placement, after screwing the provisional rehabilitation and at 12 months. Radiographs were standardized by using an individualized radiographic stent for each patient, thus ensuring a parallel technique. (Figure 1 and 2) MBL measurements were performed by one examiner who recorded on each radiograph mesially and distally, the most coronal part of the bone crest (C), the position of the implant shoulder (H), and the level of the first peri-implant bone contact with the implant (Fi ) or abutment (Fa). Then, the examiner measured the distance in millimeters of H-C, which defined the crestal marginal bone level (MBLc), while the shoulder distance of Fi was the marginal bone level of the implant (MBLi). When the first contact was located in the abutment, the distance H and Fa was recorded as the marginal bone level of the abutment (MBLa). The distance MBLc was considered positive if the mark C was coronal to H, negative if C was apical, and zero if Fi and H coincided (Figure 3). The changes in MBLc (CMBLc) were registered at 12 months with respect to the baseline. Changes in MBLc, MBLi or MBLa (CMBLc, CMBLi, CMBLa) were measured in the same time period at 12 months.
  2. Calibration The examiner, independent to the study, carried out the radiographic analysis using the Image J software (Java image processing program by Wayne Rasband; National Institutes of Health (NIH), USA) on periapical radiographs, with a x7 magnification. Previously, the examiner was calibrated 3 times separately, with an interval of 72 hours, making measurements at 10 radiographs to determine the intraoperator reproducibility. The aim was to obtain an intraclass coefficient of 0.99 (P <.05) as the intraoperator reliability coefficient.
  3. Stability evaluation The resonance frequency analysis, RFA was recorded with the Penguin® system (Integration Diagnostics Sweden) at the time of implant placement, 10-12weeks and 1year.
  4. Sample size Accepting an alpha risk of 0.05 and a beta risk of less than 0.2 in a bilateral contrast, 28 subjects were required in each group to detect a difference equal to or greater than 0.5mm. It was assumed that the standard deviation (SD) was 0.59 and a possible drop-out of 20% was estimated.
  5. Statistical analysis Analysis was performed at implant level. In order to describe the qualitative variables, absolute frequencies and percentages were used. The description of quantitative variables was performed using the mean and SD. Normal distribution of each parameter was assessed by the Shapiro-Wilk test, and as data did not follow a normal distribution a Wilcoxon test was used to compare interproximal MBLs between baseline and 12 months follow-up, and Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare interproximal MBL changes between treatment groups. The level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. The statistical package SPSS 22.0 (IBM, SPSS, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used for the statistical analysis.
Being tested
Inmediate abutment height
Keywords
definitive implant abutment, interproximal bone loss, soft tissue

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Inmediate abutment heightDevice

    The placement of the implant was done following the manufacturing protocol and using a surgical guide according to the radiological guide previously used. At this time, the Permanent® abutment of 1 or 3 mm was chosen randomly and was placed at 35 Ncm.

Study groups in NCT04230837
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
A: Abutments of 1 mmExperimentalDefinitive abutments of 1 mm height were located.
Receives: Device: Inmediate abutment height
B: Abutments of 3 mmExperimentalDefinitive abutments of 3 mm height were located.
Receives: Device: Inmediate abutment height

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Change from Baseline Bone Loss, at 8-12 weeks and 1 year.

    X-rays were taken at the time of implant placement, 8-12 weeks after placement, after screwing the provisional rehabilitation and at 12 months.

    Measured: baseline, 8-12 weeks and 1 year

  2. Mucosal thickness (MT)

    Mucosal thickness (MT) before placement of the implant using a PCP-UNC15 periodontal probe. This measure will be compared with the abutment high and bone loss at 1 year.

    Measured: baseline

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Change from Baseline the resonance frequency analysis at 8-12 weeks and 1 year.

    RFA was recorded with the Penguin® system at the time of implant placement, 8-12weeks and 1 year later.

    Measured: baseline, 8-12 weeks and 1 year

  2. Plaque index at 1 year

    Plaque index (mPII, modified plate index, Mombelli et al., 1987)

    Measured: 1 year

  3. Bleeding on probing at 1 year

    Presence of bleeding on probing (mSBI, Modified bleeding index, Mombelli et al., 1987)

    Measured: 1 year

  4. Probing depth at 1 year

    Probing depth (PD) (6 locations MV / V / DV / MP / P / DP): with a periodontal probe PCP-UNC15;

    Measured: 1 year

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted18 Jan 2020
  2. Study startJan 2017
  3. Primary completionJul 2018
  4. Study completionJul 2019

Resources

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
Randomized controlled prospective study
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Participant
Enrolment
69 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04230837
Sponsor's protocol ID
PER-ECL-2015-05
Status last verified
Jan 2020
First submitted
18 Nov 2019
Last updated
18 Jan 2020
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Blanco J, Pico A, Caneiro L, Novoa L, Batalla P, Martin-Lancharro P. Effect of abutment height on interproximal implant bone level in the early healing: A randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Jan;29(1):108-117. doi: 10.1111/clr.13108. Epub 2017 Dec 8.

    PubMed 29222809
  • Borges T, Leitao B, Pereira M, Carvalho A, Galindo-Moreno P. Influence of the abutment height and connection timing in early peri-implant marginal bone changes: A prospective randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018 Sep;29(9):907-914. doi: 10.1111/clr.13343.

    PubMed 30259582
  • Chen Z, Lin CY, Li J, Wang HL, Yu H. Influence of abutment height on peri-implant marginal bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2019 Jul;122(1):14-21.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.10.003. Epub 2019 Feb 16.

    PubMed 30782461
  • Galindo-Moreno P, Leon-Cano A, Ortega-Oller I, Monje A, Suarez F, OValle F, Spinato S, Catena A. Prosthetic Abutment Height is a Key Factor in Peri-implant Marginal Bone Loss. J Dent Res. 2014 Jul;93(7 Suppl):80S-85S. doi: 10.1177/0022034513519800. Epub 2014 Mar 12.

    PubMed 24621670
  • Linkevicius T, Apse P, Grybauskas S, Puisys A. Reaction of crestal bone around implants depending on mucosal tissue thickness. A 1-year prospective clinical study. Stomatologija. 2009;11(3):83-91.

    PubMed 19996674
  • Linkevicius T, Puisys A, Steigmann M, Vindasiute E, Linkeviciene L. Influence of Vertical Soft Tissue Thickness on Crestal Bone Changes Around Implants with Platform Switching: A Comparative Clinical Study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Dec;17(6):1228-36. doi: 10.1111/cid.12222. Epub 2014 Mar 28.

    PubMed 24673875
  • Molina A, Sanz-Sanchez I, Martin C, Blanco J, Sanz M. The effect of one-time abutment placement on interproximal bone levels and peri-implant soft tissues: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Apr;28(4):443-452. doi: 10.1111/clr.12818. Epub 2016 Mar 25.

    PubMed 27016157
  • Novoa L, Batalla P, Caneiro L, Pico A, Linares A, Blanco J. Influence of Abutment Height on Maintenance of Peri-implant Crestal Bone at Bone-Level Implants: A 3-Year Follow-up Study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2017 Sep/Oct;37(5):721-727. doi: 10.11607/prd.2762.

    PubMed 28817138
  • Puisys A, Linkevicius T. The influence of mucosal tissue thickening on crestal bone stability around bone-level implants. A prospective controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Feb;26(2):123-9. doi: 10.1111/clr.12301. Epub 2013 Dec 9.

    PubMed 24313250
  • Spinato S, Stacchi C, Lombardi T, Bernardello F, Messina M, Zaffe D. Biological width establishment around dental implants is influenced by abutment height irrespective of vertical mucosal thickness: A cluster randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Jul;30(7):649-659. doi: 10.1111/clr.13450. Epub 2019 May 12.

    PubMed 31033035
  • Vervaeke S, Dierens M, Besseler J, De Bruyn H. The influence of initial soft tissue thickness on peri-implant bone remodeling. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014 Apr;16(2):238-47. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2012.00474.x. Epub 2012 Jul 3.

    PubMed 22758656
  • Canullo L, Camacho-Alonso F, Tallarico M, Meloni SM, Xhanari E, Penarrocha-Oltra D. Mucosa Thickness and Peri-implant Crestal Bone Stability: A Clinical and Histologic Prospective Cohort Trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017 May/June;32(5):675-681. doi: 10.11607/jomi.5349. Epub 2017 Mar 15.

    PubMed 28296981

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Inmediate abutment height in people with Implant Site Reaction, run by Universitat Internacional de Catalunya at 1 site in Spain.

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 11 inclusion and 11 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 18 Jan 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Spain. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

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?

Change from Baseline Bone Loss, at 8-12 weeks and 1 year. (time frame: baseline, 8-12 weeks and 1 year). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT04230837, which also lists 12 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 18 Jan 2020.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in