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.
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.
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.
- 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).
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Conditions
- Implant Site Reaction
- 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 group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| A: Abutments of 1 mm | Experimental | Definitive abutments of 1 mm height were located. Receives: Device: Inmediate abutment height |
| B: Abutments of 3 mm | Experimental | Definitive 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.
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
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)
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
Plaque index at 1 year
Plaque index (mPII, modified plate index, Mombelli et al., 1987)
Measured: 1 year
Bleeding on probing at 1 year
Presence of bleeding on probing (mSBI, Modified bleeding index, Mombelli et al., 1987)
Measured: 1 year
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.
- First posted18 Jan 2020
- Study startJan 2017
- Primary completionJul 2018
- Study completionJul 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (12)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Implant Site ReactionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Randomized controlled prospective study
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 69 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universitat Internacional de Catalunya
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Jose Nart Molina, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya
- Investigators
- Jose Nart, Study director, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya
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 29222809Borges 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 30259582Chen 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 30782461Galindo-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 24621670Linkevicius 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 19996674Linkevicius 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 24673875Molina 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 27016157Novoa 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 28817138Puisys 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 24313250Spinato 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 31033035Vervaeke 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 22758656Canullo 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
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Jan 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Marginal Bone Levels Around Implants With Definitive Abutments Of One and Three Millimeters: A One Year Of Follow Up Randomized Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04230837
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PER-ECL-2015-05
- Conditions
- Implant Site Reaction
- Keywords
- definitive implant abutment, interproximal bone loss, soft tissue
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 69 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Universitat Internacional de CatalunyaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jan 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jul 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jul 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 18 Jan 2020 (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.
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.
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.
- 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).
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Randomized controlled prospective study
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| A: Abutments of 1 mm | Experimental | Device: Inmediate abutment heightDefinitive abutments of 1 mm height were located. |
| B: Abutments of 3 mm | Experimental | Device: Inmediate abutment heightDefinitive abutments of 3 mm height were located. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (11 listed)
- 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;
Key exclusion criteria (11 listed)
- 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.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Inmediate abutment heightThe 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. | Device | A: Abutments of 1 mm, B: Abutments of 3 mm |
Primary outcome
Change from Baseline Bone Loss, at 8-12 weeks and 1 year.
Time frame: baseline, 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.
Mucosal thickness (MT)
Time frame: baseline
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.
4 secondary outcomes
Change from Baseline the resonance frequency analysis at 8-12 weeks and 1 year.
Time frame: baseline, 8-12 weeks and 1 year
Plaque index at 1 year
Time frame: 1 year
Bleeding on probing at 1 year
Time frame: 1 year
Probing depth at 1 year
Time frame: 1 year
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 18 Jan 2020.
- Background: PubMed 29222809Blanco 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.
- Background: PubMed 30259582Borges 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.
- Background: PubMed 30782461Chen 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.
- Background: PubMed 24621670Galindo-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.
- Background: PubMed 19996674Linkevicius 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.
- Background: PubMed 24673875Linkevicius 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.
- Background: PubMed 27016157Molina 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.
- Background: PubMed 28817138Novoa 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.
- Background: PubMed 24313250Puisys 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.
- Background: PubMed 31033035Spinato 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.
- Background: PubMed 22758656Vervaeke 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.
- Background: PubMed 28296981Canullo 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.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Implant Site Reaction
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
Local Antibiotics for Breast Implants
Implant Complication, Implant Infection
RecruitingObservational study
Perioperative Oral Vitamin D3 Supplementation on Implant Osseointegration
Implant Site Reaction
RecruitingObservational study
Peri-implant Mucosal Changes Over Time Following Implant Provisional Removal in the Esthetic Zone
Tooth Loss, Implant Site Reaction
Active, not recruiting
Clinical Comparison of On1 Two-stage Abutment With One-stage Abutment on Different Implant Neck Design
Implant Site Reaction
Recruiting
Photofunctionalization With UVC
Implant Site Reaction
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.
Jose Nart study director
Universitat Internacional de Catalunya
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
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.