ClinicalTrials.Veeva

Menu

Classifying Fully Guided Surgical Guides

A

Ain Shams University

Status

Not yet enrolling

Conditions

Dental Prostheses

Treatments

Procedure: Guided implant placement

Study type

Interventional

Funder types

Other

Identifiers

Details and patient eligibility

About

Surgical guides can be classified according to support into tooth-supported, mucosa-supported, bone-supported, or a combination of these. Tooth-supported templates are further divided into unilateral or bilateral tooth support. Bilateral tooth-supported guides refer to templates that are supported by templates on both sides while unilateral tooth support refers to templates that is supported by teeth on one side and mucosa or bone from the other side. Usually, mucosa-supported guides are utilized in full arch cases in which there is no need for bone reduction. Stackable guides are the best option when bone reduction is indicated because they allow for the planning of both implant osteotomies and bone sculpturing using a single template made up of different components. This study compare all static guided protocols( bilateral tooth supported, unilateral tooth supported, full arch mucosa supported, stackable bone supported ) with each other under homogenous conditions.

Full description

Surgical guides can be classified according to support into tooth-supported, mucosa-supported, bone-supported, or a combination of these. Tooth-supported templates are further divided into unilateral or bilateral tooth support. Bilateral tooth-supported guides refer to templates that are supported by templates on both sides while unilateral tooth support refers to templates that is supported by teeth on one side and mucosa or bone from the other side. Usually, mucosa-supported guides are utilized in full arch cases in which there is no need for bone reduction. Stackable guides are the best option when bone reduction is indicated because they allow for the planning of both implant osteotomies and bone sculpturing using a single template made up of different components.

Theoretically, bilateral tooth-supported guides offer the most accuracy since they offer the best retention and biomechanical stability with anchorage on hard tissues. According to a recent systematic review, unilateral tooth guides exhibited higher deviations except in global coronal deviation where unilateral tooth-supported guides exhibited slightly lower distribution than bilateral guides, and in in vivo global apical deviation where bilateral and unilateral tooth-supported guides showed a similar data range.

Despite the increasing predictability of guided surgery, there will always be differences between the virtual plan and actual performance. The accuracy of static computer-aided implant operations was assessed in the 2018 International Team for Implantology consensus document. According to the study, the variations for the mean crestal point, apical point, angle, coronal depth, and apical depth were 1.2 mm, 1.4 mm, 3.5 o, 0.2 mm, and 0.5 mm, respectively. A safety margin of 2 mm ought to be taken into account at all times, based on the previously indicated precision.

For the purposes of this study, accuracy is defined as the closeness of spatial agreement between any given implant as planned (reference) and as inserted (measurement), expressed by four spatial deviation parameters

Enrollment

52 estimated patients

Sex

All

Ages

20 to 75 years old

Volunteers

No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

  • Missing either only one tooth or partially or fully edentulous.
  • Good oral hygiene.
  • Systemic free.

Exclusion criteria

  • Conditions that might render intraoral manipulation impossible (limited mouth opening, excessive gag reflex).
  • Bisphosphonate treatment (either at the time of screening or in the history).
  • Radiotherapy, irradiation of the mandible or the maxilla (either at the time of screening or in the history).
  • Smokers.
  • Untreated periodontal disease.

Trial design

Primary purpose

Treatment

Allocation

Randomized

Interventional model

Parallel Assignment

Masking

Single Blind

52 participants in 4 patient groups

Unilateral tooth supported
Active Comparator group
Description:
Unilateral guided implant placement
Treatment:
Procedure: Guided implant placement
Bilateral tooth supported
Active Comparator group
Description:
Bilateral guided implant placement
Treatment:
Procedure: Guided implant placement
Full arch mucosa supported
Active Comparator group
Description:
Full arch implant placement mucosa supported
Treatment:
Procedure: Guided implant placement
Stackable bone supported
Active Comparator group
Description:
Stackable guide, foundation guide and on top implant placement guide
Treatment:
Procedure: Guided implant placement

Trial contacts and locations

0

Loading...

Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov

Clinical trials

Find clinical trialsTrials by location
© Copyright 2025 Veeva Systems