NCT06400277

Brief Summary

In this study, it was aimed to compare the impressions taken with different impression techniques for the production of tissue-supported complete dentures from individuals with complete edentulous upper jaws. For this purpose, 15 individuals with complete edentulism in the upper jaw were asked to participate in the study. In addition to agreeing to participate in the study after reading the consent form, these individuals should have been using tissue-supported complete dentures in the upper jaw for at least 3 months. They should also have healthy mucosa without local factors such as tissue hyperplasia, atrophic crests, allergic reaction, epulis fissuratum. A total of five final impressions will then be taken from these individuals in two sessions. Two of these impressions will be obtained with the traditional method and three with the digital method. The traditional impression group will include one-step (ALG) and two-step (ZOE) impression techniques. The digital impression group will include the digital impression taken when the artificial intelligence is deactivated (A.I OFF), the digital impression taken when the artificial intelligence is activated (A.I ON) and the modified technique (MOD). In the first appointment, the first impressions will be taken for the traditional and digital groups. Intraoral exclusion and isolation will be provided before the digital first impression. With the A.I mode of the intraoral scanner (TRIOS4; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark) deactivated, scanning will be performed in accordance with the scanning protocol recommended by the company. A metal stock tray suitable for the dental arch will then be selected for the preliminary impression of the traditional impression group. The impression will be taken in one step with irreversible hydrocolloid impression material. The impression will be digitized with the same intraoral scanner within the first 10 minutes after impression taking. Both impressions will be digitally transferred to the dental laboratory as stl data. Using computer aided design (CAD) software (Exocad DentalCAD 2.4 Plovdiv), an individual tray will be designed for the ZOE impression in the traditional group and a pedestal for the MOD impression in the digital impression group. The designs will be transferred to the computer aided manufacturing (CAM) unit and produced with a 3D printer using dental resin. The occlusal-rim (OR) will be prepared by adding wax on the base. In the second appointment, the cheek and lips will be excluded in the same way before scanning. For A.I OFF and A.I ON, recordings will be taken when the artificial intelligence is deactivated and activated, respectively. Then, occlusal vertical dimension, intermaxillary relationship and aesthetic parameters will be determined with OR before scanning for the MOD group. Reference areas will be created on the buccal and palatinal walls to facilitate scanning of the OR. To avoid retention problems during scanning, a silicone-based impression material with a fluid consistency will be applied to the tissue surface of the OR and placed in the mouth. Scanning will be performed according to the protocol proposed by Lo Russo et al. For the traditional impression group, the ALG impression will be taken with a metal stock tray using irreversible hydrocolloid impression material in a single step. The impression will be digitized with an intraoral scanner within ten minutes of completion. Then, the edges of the individual tray for ZOE will be shaped with impression compound to ensure peripheral closure. The impression will be completed with zinc-oxide eugenol impression material. The impression will be digitized. These measurements will then be compared using a reverse-engineering program (Geomagic design X version 2016.1.0, 3D Systems Inc. Rock Hill, SC). Before the comparison, in the same program, the parts to be evaluated on the ZOE in the conventional group and A.I OFF in the digital group will be divided into regions. These areas will be divided into four sections as right and left vestibular region, postdam area, hard palate region, except for the A.I OFF-MOD comparison group. In the A.I OFF-MOD comparison group, it will include the right and left initial areas, including the areas where scanning starts in the second scan of the MOD method. In addition, all measurements will be compared in terms of the whole surface and all measurement boundaries including the whole measurement surface as one. The comparison groups are ZOE-ALG, ZOE-A.I OFF, A.I OFF-A.I ON, A.I OFF-MOD. The measurements in the comparison groups will be overlapped first with the initial alignment and then with the best fit alignment algorithm. All sections will be evaluated individually with the "3D compare" feature and the amount of deviation in the areas to be evaluated will be determined.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
15

participants targeted

Target at below P25 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Jul 2022

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

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 30, 2022

Completed
1.4 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

December 30, 2023

Completed
3 months until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

March 27, 2024

Completed
1 month until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

April 29, 2024

Completed
7 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

May 6, 2024

Completed
Last Updated

May 6, 2024

Status Verified

May 1, 2024

Enrollment Period

1.4 years

First QC Date

April 29, 2024

Last Update Submit

May 1, 2024

Conditions

Keywords

Edentulous JawDigital ImpressionPhysical Impression

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (4)

  • Three Dimensional Difference Between Irreversible Hydrocolloid and Zinc Oxide Eugenol Impressions

    Evaluation of the three-dimensional difference between two impressions using a reverse-engineering program and quantification of the deviation

    Through study completion, an average of 6 months

  • Three Dimensional Difference Between Zinc Oxide Eugenol and Intraoral Scanner AI Off Impressions

    Evaluation of the three-dimensional difference between two impressions using a reverse-engineering program and quantification of the deviation

    Through study completion, an average of 6 months

  • Three Dimensional Difference Between Intraoral Scanner AI Off and AI On Impressions

    Evaluation of the three-dimensional difference between two impressions using a reverse-engineering program and quantification of the deviation

    Through study completion, an average of 6 months

  • Three Dimensional Difference Between Intraoral Scanner AI Off and Modified Impressions

    Evaluation of the three-dimensional difference between two impressions using a reverse-engineering program and quantification of the deviation

    Through study completion, an average of 6 months

Study Arms (5)

Irreversible Hydrocolloid

OTHER

Final impression taken with irreversible hydrocolloid impression material and stock tray in single step.

Other: Edentulous maxilla final impression for complete denture

Zinc Oxide Eugenol

OTHER

Final impression taken with zinc oxide eugenol impression material and individual tray in two steps.

Other: Edentulous maxilla final impression for complete denture

Intraoral Scanner - Artificial Intelligence Off

OTHER

Final impression taken with intraoral scanner in artificial intelligence mode deactivated in single step.

Other: Edentulous maxilla final impression for complete denture

Intraoral Scanner - Artificial Intelligence On

OTHER

Final impression taken with intraoral scanner in artificial intelligence mode activated in single step.

Other: Edentulous maxilla final impression for complete denture

Intraoral Scanner - Modified

OTHER

Final impression taken with intraoral scanner in two steps using occlusal rim.

Other: Edentulous maxilla final impression for complete denture

Interventions

Final impressions of edentulous maxilla separated in two groups. In physical impression group stock and individual trays and physical impression materials used.

Intraoral Scanner - Artificial Intelligence OffIntraoral Scanner - Artificial Intelligence OnIntraoral Scanner - ModifiedIrreversible HydrocolloidZinc Oxide Eugenol

Eligibility Criteria

Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsChild (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Volunteers who had been using maxillary complete denture for at least 3 months
  • Volunteers were clinically evaluated for healthy oral mucosa

You may not qualify if:

  • Volunteers who had general health problems
  • Volunteers who had of tissue hyperplasia, labile alveolar crest, allergic reaction to the prosthesis, percussion or mucosal irritation

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Hacettepe University Faculty of Dentistry

Ankara, Altındağ, Turkey (Türkiye)

Location

Related Publications (4)

  • Lo Russo L, Salamini A, Troiano G, Guida L. Digital dentures: A protocol based on intraoral scans. J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Apr;125(4):597-602. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.02.006. Epub 2020 Apr 21.

    PMID: 32331785BACKGROUND
  • Lo Russo L, Caradonna G, Troiano G, Salamini A, Guida L, Ciavarella D. Three-dimensional differences between intraoral scans and conventional impressions of edentulous jaws: A clinical study. J Prosthet Dent. 2020 Feb;123(2):264-268. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.04.004. Epub 2019 May 29.

    PMID: 31153614BACKGROUND
  • Chebib N, Kalberer N, Srinivasan M, Maniewicz S, Perneger T, Muller F. Edentulous jaw impression techniques: An in vivo comparison of trueness. J Prosthet Dent. 2019 Apr;121(4):623-630. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.08.016. Epub 2018 Dec 21.

    PMID: 30580982BACKGROUND
  • Kahya Karaca S, Akca K. Comparison of conventional and digital impression approaches for edentulous maxilla: clinical study. BMC Oral Health. 2024 Nov 14;24(1):1378. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-05151-3.

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Jaw, Edentulous

Interventions

Denture, Complete

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Jaw DiseasesMusculoskeletal DiseasesStomatognathic DiseasesMouth, EdentulousMouth DiseasesTooth Diseases

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

DenturesDental ProsthesisProsthodonticsDentistryProstheses and ImplantsEquipment and Supplies

Study Officials

  • Sinem Kahya Karaca

    Hacettepe University

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
  • Kıvanç Akça, Prof. Dr.

    Hacettepe University

    STUDY DIRECTOR

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
NON RANDOMIZED
Masking
SINGLE
Who Masked
OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
Purpose
BASIC SCIENCE
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Research Assistant

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

April 29, 2024

First Posted

May 6, 2024

Study Start

July 30, 2022

Primary Completion

December 30, 2023

Study Completion

March 27, 2024

Last Updated

May 6, 2024

Record last verified: 2024-05

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Locations