Clinical Research Directory

Immediate Implant Placement and Immediate Restoration With Prefabricated Provisionals

* Background * There is a growing tendency to place a provisional restoration immediately following implant placement. Clinical advantages are shortening of treatment duration and soft tissue guiding during healing resulting in better esthetic outcomes. Provisional restorations can be made either chair-side or in the dental laboratory after implant placement. Nowadays, digital planning makes it possible to fabricate the provisional restoration before implant surgery. The advantage of this technique is that the treatment procedure of placement of the provisional restoration immediately after implant placement is much less time consuming for the patient and due to its machined polished character possibly beneficial for soft tissues. * Main research question The aim of this retrospective case series study, with full digital workflow, is to evaluate single tooth implant treatment after immediate implant placement in the maxillary aesthetic region, with respect to registration of possible complications during the time of placement and evaluation of the prefabricated provisional registration and evaluation of clinical and radiographical performance and aesthetic outcome with the definitive restoration after at least 1 year in function. * Design (including population, confounders/outcomes) The study design is a retrospective, single-arm observational study for evaluation of 50 patients with a failing tooth in the maxillary aesthetic region, which were treated with an implant-supported provisional and definitive restoration by means of a digital workflow. Outcomes: registration of possible complications during the time of placement and evaluation of the provisional registration and evaluation of clinical and radiographical performance and aesthetic outcome with the definitive restoration. * Expected results Satisfying results for patients and professionals (VAS-scores and PES/WES-scores).

Comparison Between Two Different Healing Abutments in Single Posterior Implants

The aim of this randomized clinical trial is to evaluate the volumetric analysis of peri-implant soft tissues after 3 months of the use of a prefabricated healing abutment with scan peg in comparison to customized healing abutment.

Alveolar Ridge Preservation Versus Spontaneous Healing

Rationale: To determine the effect of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) versus spontaneous healing (SH) in large buccal bone defects in the posterior mandible. Objective: To evaluate whether ARP using a xenograft (XG) (Cerabone plus) or an allograft (AG) (Maxgraft granules) covered by a membrane (Jason membrane) reduces the need for additional bone augmentation either prior to or during implant placement in the posterior mandible compared to spontaneous healing Study design: Prospective randomized clinical study with 10-year follow-up. Study population: Inclusion criteria: patients are 18 years or older and in need for extraction of a (pre)molar in the posterior mandible with at least one adjacent tooth and a buccal bone defect of \>50%. Exclusion criteria: the presence of active periodontal disease, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, a history of or current use of chemotherapy or radiation in the head and neck area, history of or current use of medication related to osteonecrosis of the jaw, smoking (\> 5 cigarettes a day, disability (physical and/or mental), making the patient unable to maintain basic oral health or follow the study protocol, pregnancy (in case of pregnancy, the treatment is postponed until after the delivery). Intervention (if applicable): Atraumatic extraction of a (pre)molar in the posterior mandible will be performed. Patients will then be included based on the dimensions of the buccal bone defect (buccal bone defect of \>50%). 66 patients will be randomly divided in either the XG group, the AG group or the SH group (control). In the ARP groups (XG and AG), following tooth extraction, ARP will be performed using either a XG (Cerabone plus) or an AG (Maxgraft granules), both covered by a membrane (Jason membrane). In the control group, the alveolus will be left for spontaneous healing, following tooth extraction. After 4-6 months, a cone bean computed tomography (CBCT) scan will be performed to determine the possibility of implant placement with or without additional augmentation. Implant placement will be performed in all groups with or without guided bone regeneration (GBR). Main study parameters/endpoints: Frequency of additional augmentation at implant placement.