The Use of Bone-, Tooth- and Mucosa- Supported Stereolithographic Guides for Dental Implant Placement
stereolitho
Conventional Versus Computer Aided Implantology
2 other identifiers
interventional
61
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Introduction: The use stereolithographic (SLA) guides may provide significant benefits in simultaneous placement of multiple implants, especially in large edentulous areas lacking anatomic landmarks for surgical reference. Planning of the implant positions prior to surgery may shorten the duration of the surgery spent by exploring and determining the suitable implant location on the edentulous alveolar crest in the standard technique . Previous studies have demonstrated the use of many SLA guide in this manner, however; most were designed to be used as placed on the alveolar crest (bone-supported) following a flap exposure, and there was no depth-control of the osteotomy drills. Further advances in stereolithography allowed flapless surgeries to be performed via mucosa-supported guides (Rosenfeld, et al. 2006c, Tardieu, et al. 2007). The use of these guides eliminates not only the time required for incision and flap exposure but post-operative patient morbidity and discomfort may also be reduced, due to the non-invasive nature of the procedure. The aim of this study is to investigate the accuracy, surgical and post-operative complications and post-loading outcomes of implants placed by the conventional and aforementioned computer-aided methods.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable
Started Jul 2008
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
July 1, 2008
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
January 1, 2009
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
December 1, 2009
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
December 7, 2009
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
December 8, 2009
CompletedNovember 27, 2013
June 1, 2007
6 months
December 7, 2009
November 26, 2013
Conditions
Keywords
Study Arms (2)
Conventional implant placement method
PLACEBO COMPARATORThe patients in ths group will be treated by conventional, "free-hand" implant placement
Computer-guidedimplant placement
ACTIVE COMPARATORIn this group, the patients will be treated by implants placed via computer generated SLA guides
Interventions
Compute generated Mucosa-supported single-type guides
Computer generated, Multiple type Bone-supported guides
Dental implants placed via conventional free-hand method
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Healthy patient with at leat one edentuşous jaw
You may not qualify if:
- Patients with at least one edentulous jaw with healthy systemic and oral status without severe alveolar bone athrophy, major alveolar hard and/or soft tissue deficiency, mouth opening restriction, heavy smoking (\> 10 /per day) and parafunctional habits were included in the study.
- All patients were initially evaluated for the suitability of an implant supported fixed prosthesis and any patients unsuitable for such prosthetic superstructure (i.e. severe hard and soft tissue athrophy, insufficient hygiene practice etc.) were excluded.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Department of Oral Implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, ıstnabul University
Istanbul, Capa, 34390, Turkey (Türkiye)
Related Publications (4)
Arisan V, Karabuda ZC, Ozdemir T. Accuracy of two stereolithographic guide systems for computer-aided implant placement: a computed tomography-based clinical comparative study. J Periodontol. 2010 Jan;81(1):43-51. doi: 10.1902/jop.2009.090348.
PMID: 20059416RESULTArisan V, Karabuda CZ, Ozdemir T. Implant surgery using bone- and mucosa-supported stereolithographic guides in totally edentulous jaws: surgical and post-operative outcomes of computer-aided vs. standard techniques. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010 Sep;21(9):980-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01957.x. Epub 2010 May 24.
PMID: 20497439RESULTArisan V, Karabuda CZ, Mumcu E, Ozdemir T. Implant positioning errors in freehand and computer-aided placement methods: a single-blind clinical comparative study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013 Jan-Feb;28(1):190-204. doi: 10.11607/jomi.2691.
PMID: 23377066RESULTArisan V, Bolukbasi N, Oksuz L. Computer-assisted flapless implant placement reduces the incidence of surgery-related bacteremia. Clin Oral Investig. 2013 Dec;17(9):1985-93. doi: 10.1007/s00784-012-0886-y. Epub 2012 Dec 6.
PMID: 23224042RESULT
MeSH Terms
Interventions
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- STUDY CHAIR
Tayfun Ozdemir, Prof.Dr.
Section head: Department of Implantology, Faculty of Dentistry, Istabul University
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Volkan Arısan, Dr.Med.Dent
Department of Oral Implantology, Istanbul University
- STUDY DIRECTOR
Cuneyt Z Karabuda, Prof.Dr.
Department of Oral Implantology, Istanbul University
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- NON RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- SUPPORTIVE CARE
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
December 7, 2009
First Posted
December 8, 2009
Study Start
July 1, 2008
Primary Completion
January 1, 2009
Study Completion
December 1, 2009
Last Updated
November 27, 2013
Record last verified: 2007-06