Esthetic Outcomes of Immediately Placed Implants Receiving Immediate Provisionalization and Delayed Restoration

University of Michigan

Status

Completed

Conditions

Tooth Extraction

Dental Implant

Tooth Diseases

Treatments

Device: Control: delayed restoration

Device: Test (immediate restoration)

Study type

Interventional

Funder types

Other

Identifiers

NCT01925339

HUM00070747

Details and patient eligibility

About

The purpose of this study is to compare two different timings of restoring dental implants that are placed right after tooth extraction: The test group will have the provisional crown placed at the time of implant placement. The control group will have the tooth removed and the implant placed at the same appointment but restorations placed after 4 months. Both procedures currently are accepted methods for replacing missing teeth but direct comparisons of the two procedures are lacking. The results of this study should aid clinicians in selecting the best timing for restoring implants for their patients. The hypothesis is that immediate restoration might increase aesthetic outcomes, e.g. less mucosal recession.

Full description

A single center, randomized controlled, parallel-arm study is planned to investigate esthetic outcomes after immediate placement and restoration in the esthetic zone. Forty adult patients who have a hopeless maxillary anterior or premolar tooth, with intact adjacent teeth will be enrolled. A signed written informed consent will be obtained after he or she has been given verbal and written information describing the nature and duration of the study. Subjects will not be screened or treated until an informed consent has been obtained. Patient information will be protected according to the privacy regulations of the Federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA).

The enrolled patients will be randomly placed into one of two treatment groups, immediate implant placement (IIP) and restoration group (IR) or the IIP + delayed restoration group (DR). For all patients, the hopeless tooth will be extracted atraumatically and an implant placed immediately. The decision will be made randomly to either restoring the implant immediately (Test group) with a provisional crown or restoring the implant at 4 months after implant placement (Control group). Outcome analyses will be performed until approximately 1-year after the implant surgery and primarily evaluate clinical and radiographic parameters to determine the esthetic outcomes of immediately restored IIP implants, in comparison to those immediately placed but restored in a delayed approach.

Enrollment

40 patients

Sex

All

Ages

21+ years old

Volunteers

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

Male or female, aged 21 or older
A minimum dentition of 20 permanent teeth (including natural rooted teeth or dental implants; pontic of a fixed bridge is not considered a tooth)
A maxillary premolar, canine, lateral incisor or central incisor with a hopeless prognosis
Presence of adjacent teeth and enough clearance for an implant crown
Presence of sufficient bone apical to the root apex of the hopeless tooth

Exclusion criteria

Systemic criteria:

Current heavy smokers (>10 cigarettes per day) or heavy smokers who quitted less than 1 year
Pregnant or plan to get pregnant or lactating mothers
Diseases of the immune system or any medical condition that may influence the outcome (uncontrolled diabetes (HbA1c >7), neurologic or psychiatric disorders, systemic infections, ...)
Radiation therapy in the head and neck area within 3 years
Current use of oral bisphosphonates for >3 years
History of IV bisphosphonates use
Other medical conditions that may contradict an implant surgery

Intraoral criteria:

Area of study is adjacent to an existing implant
Acute infection at/or adjacent to the extraction site (e.g., sinus tract, swelling, etc.)
Observable gingival changes due to use of medications such as calcium antagonists, anticonvulsives, immunosuppressives, anti-inflammatory medications, etc.)
Untreated deep carious lesions or defective restorations that can potentially exacerbate during the course of the experiment
Uncontrolled periodontal disease
Poor oral hygiene (>20% FMPS)

CBCT criteria:

• More than 4 mm of buccal plate dehiscence is present on CBCT scans

Intraoperative criteria:

• More than 4 mm of buccal plate dehiscence is present once the tooth is extracted