Clinical Research Directory

Influence of the Primary Stability and Temporary Prosthetics

The goal of this clinical trial is to to determine how different primary implant stability and loading management affect implant osseointegration and further function after one year. The main questions it aims to answer are: is primary stability of inserted implant needed for implant integration? Does primary stability and restoration mode of the implant influence marginal bone stability of that implant? Researchers will compare crestal bone levels and primary stability of the implant after insertion in 3 groups. Subjects will be assigned to groups, acoording to primary stability developed during insertion of the implant. Study groups - (1) If stability is low (5-10 N/cm), Megagen BlueDiamond implants will be inserted, and a temporary prosthesis will not be placed; the implant will be sutured; (2) If stability is moderate (15-35 N/cm), Megagen BlueDiamond implants will be inserted, and a custom plastic gingiva-forming healing abutment will be placed; (3) If stability is high (40 N/cm and higher), Megagen BlueDiamond implants will be inserted, and a temporary plastic crown will be placed. Primary outcome of the study will be implant integration, secondary ourtcomes - implant insertion depth during insertion and after osseointegration, marginal bone stability after prosthesis delivery and after one year, determination of the PES (pink esthetic score) index after prosthesis delivery and after 1 year, determination of the ISQ value after implant insertion and after osseointegration, changes in gingival volume around the implants after 1 year, determination of the Plaque Index (PI) after prosthesis delivery and after 1 year, determination of the Probing Pocket Depth (PPD) after prosthesis delivery and after 1 year, determination of the Bleeding on Probing (BOP) index after prosthesis delivery and after 1 year.

Immediate Restoration of a New Implant With High Primary Stability

The main objective of this scientific study is to evaluate the short-term (1-year) survival and success rates of dental implants restored immediately compared to implants restored after a three-month healing period. The total duration of the study is 12 months following implant placement, during which clinical and radiographic evaluations will be carried out at different follow-up time points.

Vertical Root Extraction for Immediate Implant

Immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone has become a preferred treatment modality due to its potential to shorten treatment duration, reduce surgical interventions, and preserve the natural contour of peri-implant tissues (Chen \& Buser, 2009; Lang et al., 2012). Despite these advantages, the technique remains surgically demanding, especially in the anterior maxilla, where the labial plate is often thin and highly susceptible to post-extraction resorption (Spray et al., 2000; Chappuis et al., 2017). The greatest dimensional changes in alveolar ridge volume occur within the first 8-12 weeks after tooth extraction, with reductions in both height and width of the buccal bone crest (Araújo \& Lindhe, 2005; Tan et al., 2012). This remodeling compromises mucogingival architecture, often leading to mid-facial soft tissue recession and esthetic failures. Conventional extraction methods, which apply rotational or lateral forces using elevators and forceps, risk fracturing the socket walls and accelerating bone loss (Araujo \& Lindhe, 2009; Oghli \& Steveling, 2010). The introduction of atraumatic extraction systems aimed to address this challenge. The Benex vertical extraction system operates by inserting a screw into the root canal and applying controlled vertical traction. This approach minimizes lateral stress on socket walls, theoretically preserving the thin labial plate, which is critical for esthetic success (Muska et al., 2013; Canellas et al., 2021). Vertical traction avoids socket expansion and microfractures, enabling safer immediate implant placement in compromised situations. Case reports and retrospective series have demonstrated encouraging clinical results with Benex, including intact labial plates on CBCT, high implant survival, and favorable Pink Esthetic Scores (Fürhauser et al., 2005; Canellas et al., 2021). Patients also report reduced discomfort and trauma perception, suggesting potential psychosocial benefits. However, most of the current evidence is based on small-scale case series (Blus \& Szmukler-Moncler, 2010; Singla \& Sharma, 2020), and randomized controlled trials comparing Benex-assisted extraction with conventional atraumatic extraction are lacking. A robust RCT evaluating both objective esthetic outcomes (Midfacial mucosal recession, PES, CBCT bone preservation) and subjective patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) is therefore essential to validate the clinical value of the Benex system in the esthetic zone.