Passive Fit and Time Efficiency in All On-X Implants Protocols Using Photogrammetry, Splinted Scan Bodies, and Conventional Impression Technique

NCT07235072 | Not Yet Recruiting

• 1 other identifier: RECO6U/22-2025
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 14
• Locations: 0 countries
• Sites: N/A

Brief Summary

compare the passive fit of three impression techniques: photogrammetry, intraoral digital scanning with splinted scan bodies, and the conventional open-tray impression technique, within the context of the All-on-X treatment concept. This comparison is expected to provide valuable clinical evidence to support clinicians in making informed decisions when considering the adoption of digital alternatives to conventional methods.

Conditions

Passive Fit of Full-arch Implant Prostheses

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Passive fit measured using 3D inspection software (Geomagic Control X)

  Immediately after framework verification

Secondary Outcomes (1)

• Time efficiency, assessed using stop watch and measured by seconds.

  During impression procedure

Study Arms (3)

Photogrammetry-Based Full-Arch Impression

EXPERIMENTAL

Device: Photogrammetry-Based Full-Arch Impression

Digital Impression Using Splinted Scan Bodies

EXPERIMENTAL

Device: Digital Impression Using Splinted Scan Bodies

Conventional Open-Tray Implant Impression

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Procedure: Conventional Open-Tray Implant Impression

Interventions

Photogrammetry-Based Full-Arch Impression DEVICE

Use of a photogrammetry system to capture the positions of All-on-X implants digitally without physical impression materials. The technique aims to achieve precise passive fit and reduce chairside working time. Measurements of passive fit discrepancy and total procedure time will be recorded

Photogrammetry-Based Full-Arch Impression

Digital Impression Using Splinted Scan Bodies DEVICE

Digital full-arch impression using splinted scan bodies connected with resin to enhance stability. An intraoral scanner captures the splinted assembly for framework fabrication. Passive fit and working time will be evaluated

Digital Impression Using Splinted Scan Bodies

Conventional Open-Tray Implant Impression PROCEDURE

Traditional full-arch open-tray impression using polyether or VPS material with splinted impression copings. This serves as the standard comparator for evaluating passive fit and procedure duration

Conventional Open-Tray Implant Impression

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 45 Years - 65 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Adults aged 45-65 years.
• Fully edentulous or partially edentulous maxilla requiring full-arch rehabilitation.
• Sufficient maxillary bone volume to support at least four implants according to the All-on-X protocol.
• Systemically healthy patients with no contraindications to dental implant surgery (ASA I-II classification).
• Demonstrated ability to maintain adequate oral hygiene.
• Willingness to participate in the study and comply with follow-up visits and required maintenance protocols.
• Patients seeking a fixed, implant-supported prosthesis for the maxilla due to missing teeth and inability to use removable prostheses effectively.
• Acceptable radiographic findings with no signs of pathology, infection, or significant anatomical limitations.

You may not qualify if:

• Uncontrolled systemic diseases (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes, osteoporosis, immunosuppressive disorders)
• History of radiation therapy to the head and neck region
• Active periodontal disease or untreated caries
• Maxillary cysts, tumors, or pathologies
• Poor oral hygiene or inability to maintain postoperative care
• Insufficient bone volume for All-on-X without extensive grafting
• Maxillary sinus pathology or oroantral fistula
• Psychiatric illness or cognitive impairment affecting compliance
• Bruxism or parafunctional habits
• Pregnant or lactating women
• History of implant failure or titanium allergy
• Use of bisphosphonates or antiresorptive medications
• Heavy smoking (\>10 cigarettes/day)
• Inability or unwillingness to attend follow-up visits
• Diagnosed or symptomatic temporomandibular joint disorders (pain, clicking, locking, limited opening)

Sponsors & Collaborators

• October 6 University: lead

Related Publications (3)

• Jasim AG, Abo Elezz MG, Altonbary GY, Elsyad MA. Accuracy of digital and conventional implant-level impression techniques for maxillary full-arch screw-retained prosthesis: A crossover randomized trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2024 Aug;26(4):714-723. doi: 10.1111/cid.13336. Epub 2024 May 10.

  PMID: 38727015 RESULT

• Papaspyridakos P, De Souza A, Finkelman M, Sicilia E, Gotsis S, Chen YW, Vazouras K, Chochlidakis K. Digital vs Conventional Full-Arch Implant Impressions: A Retrospective Analysis of 36 Edentulous Jaws. J Prosthodont. 2023 Apr;32(4):325-330. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13536. Epub 2022 May 31.

  PMID: 35524647 RESULT

• Drancourt N, Auduc C, Mouget A, Mouminoux J, Auroy P, Veyrune JL, El Osta N, Nicolas E. Accuracy of Conventional and Digital Impressions for Full-Arch Implant-Supported Prostheses: An In Vitro Study. J Pers Med. 2023 May 15;13(5):832. doi: 10.3390/jpm13050832.

  PMID: 37241002 RESULT

Central Study Contacts

Mohammed Fathy Ghobashy, Bachelor of Dental Surgery

CONTACT

00201099632823; mo97.fathy@gmail.com

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: NON RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: DIAGNOSTIC
• Intervention Model: CROSSOVER
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Master's Degree Candidate , Prosthodontics Department, October 6 University

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: November 14, 2025
• First Posted: November 19, 2025
• Study Start: March 1, 2026
• Primary Completion (Estimated): September 1, 2026
• Study Completion (Estimated): October 1, 2026
• Last Updated: November 24, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-11

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will share
• Shared Documents: STUDY PROTOCOL, SAP, ICF, CSR, ANALYTIC CODE