NCT06742151

Brief Summary

Treated by dental implant is a well document and popular therapy nowadays. Placement of a dental implant in an ideal three-dimensional position is critical in achieving a predictable long-term success. However, healing of an extraction socket involves bone remodeling, which inevitably leads to atrophic changes of the alveolar ridge. Studies have shown that most of the resorption occurs during the first 3 months of healing, although dimensional changes can be observed up to 1 year after tooth extraction, resulting in approximately 50% reduction of the bucco-lingual dimension of the alveolar ridge, mainly due to the resorption of the bundle bone plate. Therefore, the timing of implant placement in extraction sockets can influence the surgery operability and treatment period of time. The classifications of timing of implant placement in extraction sockets as following: Type I: immediate implant placement: implant placement immediately following tooth extraction and as part of the same surgical procedure. Type II: early implant placement: surgery after complete soft tissue coverage of the socket (typically 4\~8 weeks). Type III: early implant placement: implant surgery after substantial clinical and/or radiographic bone fill of the socket (typically 12\~16 weeks). Type IV: late implant placement: surgery at healed site (typically more than 16 weeks). Considering of technique sensitivity and treatment time consuming, early implant placement is the most acceptable clinically. Many techniques have been developed to maintain the architecture of residual alveolar ridges and regenerative techniques for socket preservation is one of them. This procedure has been widely tested in controlled and uncontrolled studies with various materials and clinical approaches. However, this procedure may require longer treatment period compare to conventional or early implant placement protocol. Meanwhile, there is no study revealed how often and when does socket preservation need to prevent the residual ridge deformity in our daily clinical practice. The aim of the study is try to retrospectively find out the possible advantages and percentage of ridge preservation after tooth extraction in order to understand whether the socket preservation technique is necessary after tooth extraction, and the possible factors which might affect the clinical decision-making.

Trial Health

100
On Track

Trial Health Score

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

Enrollment
133

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for all trials

Timeline
Completed

Started Apr 2014

Longer than P75 for all trials

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

April 10, 2014

Completed
3.7 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

January 3, 2018

Completed
1.2 years until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

March 31, 2019

Completed
5.7 years until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

December 16, 2024

Completed
3 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

December 19, 2024

Completed
Last Updated

December 24, 2024

Status Verified

December 1, 2024

Enrollment Period

3.7 years

First QC Date

December 16, 2024

Last Update Submit

December 19, 2024

Conditions

Keywords

alveolar ridge preservationEarly implant placement

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • reason for tooth extraction

    due to caries, periodontal disease, tooth fracture, residual root, endodontic failure

    at the day of implant surgery

Secondary Outcomes (1)

  • Radiographic analysis

    at the day of implant surgery

Study Arms (2)

Group 1

Patient who received an implant after surgery.

Procedure: implant can be placed or not

Group 2

Patient who didn't receive an implant due to insufficient bone volume or implant primary stability for implant placement.

Procedure: implant can be placed or not

Interventions

the possibility of receiving dental implants

Group 1Group 2

Eligibility Criteria

Age21 Years - 81 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)
Sampling MethodNon-Probability Sample
Study Population

Patients who plan to have single implant surgery from July 2009 to August 2015 were included in this study.

You may qualify if:

  • periapical film at the time of tooth extraction
  • implant surgery was scheduled within 4 months after tooth extraction.

You may not qualify if:

  • \- who cannot identify the reason for tooth extraction or unclear periapical film

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Related Publications (6)

  • Ahn JJ, Shin HI. Bone tissue formation in extraction sockets from sites with advanced periodontal disease: a histomorphometric study in humans. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008 Nov-Dec;23(6):1133-8.

    PMID: 19216285BACKGROUND
  • Araujo MG, Lindhe J. Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 2005 Feb;32(2):212-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00642.x.

    PMID: 15691354BACKGROUND
  • Buser D, Chappuis V, Belser UC, Chen S. Implant placement post extraction in esthetic single tooth sites: when immediate, when early, when late? Periodontol 2000. 2017 Feb;73(1):84-102. doi: 10.1111/prd.12170.

    PMID: 28000278BACKGROUND
  • Cardaropoli G, Araujo M, Hayacibara R, Sukekava F, Lindhe J. Healing of extraction sockets and surgically produced - augmented and non-augmented - defects in the alveolar ridge. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 2005 May;32(5):435-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2005.00692.x.

    PMID: 15842256BACKGROUND
  • Cardaropoli G, Araujo M, Lindhe J. Dynamics of bone tissue formation in tooth extraction sites. An experimental study in dogs. J Clin Periodontol. 2003 Sep;30(9):809-18. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-051x.2003.00366.x.

    PMID: 12956657BACKGROUND
  • Hammerle CH, Araujo MG, Simion M; Osteology Consensus Group 2011. Evidence-based knowledge on the biology and treatment of extraction sockets. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Feb;23 Suppl 5:80-2. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02370.x.

    PMID: 22211307BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Interventions

Nuclear Receptor Subfamily 4, Group A, Member 2

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Orphan Nuclear ReceptorsDNA-Binding ProteinsProteinsAmino Acids, Peptides, and ProteinsReceptors, Cytoplasmic and Nuclear

Study Officials

  • CHUNJUNG CHEN, MS

    Chimei Medical Center

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

Study Type
observational
Observational Model
COHORT
Time Perspective
CROSS SECTIONAL
Target Duration
1 Day
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Director of Periodontics

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

December 16, 2024

First Posted

December 19, 2024

Study Start

April 10, 2014

Primary Completion

January 3, 2018

Study Completion

March 31, 2019

Last Updated

December 24, 2024

Record last verified: 2024-12

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share