Clinical Research Directory

Implant Stability Changes Using Underdrilling Versus Osseodensification Protocols for Posterior Dental Implants

This clinical trial aims to compare two drilling protocols Underdrilling and Osseodensification for placing dental implants in patients with low bone density. The purpose is to compare which technique provides better primary and secondary implant stability in the posterior regions of the jaw with low bone density. The hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in implant stability between the two protocols.

Effect of Topical Application of Atorvastatin Gel Versus Hyaluronic Acid on Immediate Loading Dental Implant in Posterior Maxilla

Background: In recent years, there has been a rise in the use of immediate loading protocols; however, the complex anatomy of the posterior maxilla presents challenges. Currently, there is a lack of comparative studies assessing the effects of hyaluronic acid and atorvastatin gel on enhancing bone density in this region in conjunction with immediate loading. This study aimed to compare the effect of topical application of atorvastatin gel versus hyaluronic acid around immediately loaded dental implant that replacing missed maxillary posterior teeth. Patients and methods: twenty one patients were chosen from the Outpatient Clinic in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University seeking implant placement. Patients were divided randomly and equally into three groups: group I (control group): 7 patients received implants without coating by any materials. Group II \[Hyaluronic acid (HA) group\]: 7 patients received implants coated with HA gel .Group III \[atorvastatin (ATV) group\]: 7 patients received implants coated with ATV gel. Clinical evaluation of implant stability was performed at the time of implant insertion and after 3 and 6 months postoperative. Also, peri-implant pocket depth (PPD) and modified sulcus bleeding index (mSBI) were evaluated. Radiographical evaluation of bone density (BD) was performed immediately and after 6 months postoperatively of implant loading using CBCT. All clinical and radiographic data were subjected to statistical analysis.

Prospective Longitudinal Clinical Study for the Evaluation of Peri-implant Tissue and Osseointegration After Rehabilitation With Osseointegrated Implants

The success of rehabilitation with osseointegrated implants is associated with numerous factors, including patient characteristics, installed implants, proper planning, and the prosthetic connections used. In the long term, success is closely related to the clinical radiographic follow-up of the implanted region and the identification of intrinsic or extrinsic factors that may interfere with implant survival. Therefore, the objective of this study is to evaluate, through clinical and radiographic analysis, the peri-implant tissues and prosthetic connections of research participants rehabilitated with osseointegrated implants at the Implant Dentistry Clinic of the Federal Fluminense University, over a period of 5 years. This will be a double-blind longitudinal study. A total of 148 research participants will be selected, respecting the inclusion criteria: completion of surgical-prosthetic planning by the Implant Dentistry Clinic team at UFF, including osseointegrated implants and prosthetic components manufactured by SIN Implant System (São Paulo, Brazil); agreeing to and signing the informed consent form, being willing to be monitored for a period of 5 years; systemically healthy patients who do not use antiresorptive and antiangiogenic drugs; patients with a plaque index \<20% (Ainamo \& Bay 1975) and bleeding on probing \<20% (Muhlemann \& Son 1971) at the start of the study. Participants will undergo clinical and radiographic analysis of peri-implant tissues and prosthetic connections at the following intervals: up to 7 days after implant installation (Time 0), at the time of prosthesis installation (Time 1), 6 months after prosthesis installation (Time 2), and 1 to 5 years after prosthesis installation (Times 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, respectively). It is expected that this longitudinal study will lead to a better understanding of the factors influencing peri-implant bone loss and long-term success.