CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04329156Updated Dec 4, 2023

Evaluation Of Peri-Implant Emergence Profile Conditioned With Two Different Prosthetic Techniques

An interventional study of Digitally Flip Technique and Stock Healing Abutment in Dental Implants, sponsored by Nourhan M.Aly. Completed at 1 site in Egypt. Open to participants aged 20 Years to 40 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-12-04.

Sponsored by Nourhan M.Aly · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
24
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
20 Years to 40 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare two prosthetic conditioning techniques to create natural-like peri-implant emergence profile.

Read the detailed description

Twenty four patients having a non-restorable tooth will be rehabilitated with flapless immediate implant placement after tooth extraction. The emergence profile will be conditioned with either a stock or a customized healing abutment. A definitive screw retained restoration will be inserted 4 months postoperatively. Peri-implant tissues will be evaluated using pink and white esthetic score, radiographs and periodontal parameters at 3,6 and 12 months after implant placement.

02

Conditions studied

  • Dental Implants
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Nourhan M.Aly is the lead sponsor of 48 studies on the registry; 4 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
20 Years to 40 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Presence of non-restorable maxillary anterior or premolar tooth and its healthy contra-lateral.
  • The gingival contour of the tooth to be extracted should be in harmony with the healthy contra-lateral tooth.
  • Having thick gingival biotype.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Any medical disorder that could interfere with osseointegration or soft tissue healing.
  • Active oral infections or periodontal disease.
  • Presence of dehiscence or fenestration defects related to the tooth to be extracted.
  • Poor oral hygiene.
  • Heavy smokers (>10 cigarette / day).
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
24 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Digitally Flip Technique

    Other: Digitally Flip Technique

  • Active comparator
    Stock Healing Abutment

    Other: Stock Healing Abutment

Interventions

  • OtherDigitally Flip Technique

    A prefabricated shell will be made then after implant placement, the shell will be attached to a plastic abutment using flowable composite to make a customized healing abutment.

  • OtherStock Healing Abutment

    After implant placement, a stock healing abutment will be placed onto the implant and screwed on. It will be selected to be 1-2 mm above the gingival margin and slightly smaller in diameter than the intended final restoration.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Pink esthetic score (PES)

    The PES is based on seven variables: mesial papilla, distal papilla, soft-tissue level, soft tissue contour, alveolar process deficiency, soft-tissue color and texture. Each variable will be assessed with a 2-1-0 score, with 2 being the best and 0 being the poorest score.

    Time frame: 3 months

  2. Pink esthetic score (PES)

    The PES is based on seven variables: mesial papilla, distal papilla, soft-tissue level, soft tissue contour, alveolar process deficiency, soft-tissue color and texture. Each variable will be assessed with a 2-1-0 score, with 2 being the best and 0 being the poorest score.

    Time frame: 6 months

  3. Pink esthetic score (PES)

    The PES is based on seven variables: mesial papilla, distal papilla, soft-tissue level, soft tissue contour, alveolar process deficiency, soft-tissue color and texture. Each variable will be assessed with a 2-1-0 score, with 2 being the best and 0 being the poorest score.

    Time frame: 12 months

  4. White esthetic score (WES)

    The WES is based on five variables of the clinical crown: general tooth form; outline and volume, color, surface texture, translucency and characterization. Each variable will be assessed with a 2-1-0 score, with 2 being the best and 0 being the poorest score.

    Time frame: 6 months

  5. White esthetic score (WES)

    The WES is based on five variables of the clinical crown: general tooth form; outline and volume, color, surface texture, translucency and characterization. Each variable will be assessed with a 2-1-0 score, with 2 being the best and 0 being the poorest score.

    Time frame: 12 months

  6. Peri-implant Probing Depth (PD)

    Peri-implant probing depth refers to the distance from the gingival margin to the bottom of the sulcus depth. The peri-implant sulcus depth will be measured using a graduated plastic autoclavable periodontal probe. In addition to the aforementioned intervals, it will be measured at the day of final restoration placement. The probe will be held parallel to the long axis of the implant and introduced with light force to the peri-implants sulcus.Measurements will be made at 6 sites around each implant; mesio-buccal, mid-buccal, disto-buccal, mesio-palatal, mid-palatal and disto-palatal. Probing depth of 1 mm or less will be recorded as 1 mm, and those exceeding 1 mm, but less than 2 mm, will be recorded as 2 mm, and so on.

    Time frame: 3 months

  7. Peri-implant Probing Depth (PD)

    Peri-implant probing depth refers to the distance from the gingival margin to the bottom of the sulcus depth. The peri-implant sulcus depth will be measured using a graduated plastic autoclavable periodontal probe. In addition to the aforementioned intervals, it will be measured at the day of final restoration placement. The probe will be held parallel to the long axis of the implant and introduced with light force to the peri-implants sulcus.Measurements will be made at 6 sites around each implant; mesio-buccal, mid-buccal, disto-buccal, mesio-palatal, mid-palatal and disto-palatal. Probing depth of 1 mm or less will be recorded as 1 mm, and those exceeding 1 mm, but less than 2 mm, will be recorded as 2 mm, and so on.

    Time frame: 6 months

  8. Peri-implant Probing Depth (PD)

    Peri-implant probing depth refers to the distance from the gingival margin to the bottom of the sulcus depth. The peri-implant sulcus depth will be measured using a graduated plastic autoclavable periodontal probe. In addition to the aforementioned intervals, it will be measured at the day of final restoration placement. The probe will be held parallel to the long axis of the implant and introduced with light force to the peri-implants sulcus.Measurements will be made at 6 sites around each implant; mesio-buccal, mid-buccal, disto-buccal, mesio-palatal, mid-palatal and disto-palatal. Probing depth of 1 mm or less will be recorded as 1 mm, and those exceeding 1 mm, but less than 2 mm, will be recorded as 2 mm, and so on.

    Time frame: 12 months

  9. Modified Sulcus Bleeding Index (BI)

    A score of 0-3 will be assigned to each labial and palatal surface of the implant then the average for each implant will be calculated according to the following criteria: Score 0: No bleeding when a periodontal probe is passed along the gingival margin adjacent to the implant. Score 1: Isolated bleeding spots visible. Score 2: Blood forms a confluent red line on margin. Score 3: Heavy or profuse bleeding.

    Time frame: 3 months

  10. Modified Sulcus Bleeding Index (BI)

    A score of 0-3 will be assigned to each labial and palatal surface of the implant then the average for each implant will be calculated according to the following criteria: Score 0: No bleeding when a periodontal probe is passed along the gingival margin adjacent to the implant. Score 1: Isolated bleeding spots visible. Score 2: Blood forms a confluent red line on margin. Score 3: Heavy or profuse bleeding.

    Time frame: 6 months

  11. Modified Sulcus Bleeding Index (BI)

    A score of 0-3 will be assigned to each labial and palatal surface of the implant then the average for each implant will be calculated according to the following criteria: Score 0: No bleeding when a periodontal probe is passed along the gingival margin adjacent to the implant. Score 1: Isolated bleeding spots visible. Score 2: Blood forms a confluent red line on margin. Score 3: Heavy or profuse bleeding.

    Time frame: 12 months

  12. Modified Plaque Index (PI)

    The presence or absence of plaque around abutments will be scored at four sites of each implant; buccal, lingual, mesial and distal then the mean will be calculated. This will be carried-out by visual inspection with the aid of a mouth mirror and a plastic periodontal probe after air drying of the abutments. The criteria for assessment include: Score 0: No plaque in the gingival area, tested by running the side of plastic probe along the abutment surface at the entrance to the peri-implant sulcus. Score 1: Presence of a film of plaque near the gingival margin recognized by running the plastic periodontal probe along the abutment surface. Score 2: Moderate accumulation of plaque near or within the peri-implant sulcus, which could be seen naked eye. Score 3: Abundant plaque or soft matter within the peri-implant sulcus and or the mucosal sulcus margin and adjacent implant surface.

    Time frame: 3 months

  13. Modified Plaque Index (PI)

    The presence or absence of plaque around abutments will be scored at four sites of each implant; buccal, lingual, mesial and distal then the mean will be calculated. This will be carried-out by visual inspection with the aid of a mouth mirror and a plastic periodontal probe after air drying of the abutments. The criteria for assessment include: Score 0: No plaque in the gingival area, tested by running the side of plastic probe along the abutment surface at the entrance to the peri-implant sulcus. Score 1: Presence of a film of plaque near the gingival margin recognized by running the plastic periodontal probe along the abutment surface. Score 2: Moderate accumulation of plaque near or within the peri-implant sulcus, which could be seen naked eye. Score 3: Abundant plaque or soft matter within the peri-implant sulcus and or the mucosal sulcus margin and adjacent implant surface.

    Time frame: 6 months

  14. Modified Plaque Index (PI)

    The presence or absence of plaque around abutments will be scored at four sites of each implant; buccal, lingual, mesial and distal then the mean will be calculated. This will be carried-out by visual inspection with the aid of a mouth mirror and a plastic periodontal probe after air drying of the abutments. The criteria for assessment include: Score 0: No plaque in the gingival area, tested by running the side of plastic probe along the abutment surface at the entrance to the peri-implant sulcus. Score 1: Presence of a film of plaque near the gingival margin recognized by running the plastic periodontal probe along the abutment surface. Score 2: Moderate accumulation of plaque near or within the peri-implant sulcus, which could be seen naked eye. Score 3: Abundant plaque or soft matter within the peri-implant sulcus and or the mucosal sulcus margin and adjacent implant surface.

    Time frame: 12 months

  15. Radiographic evaluation of alveolar bone using cone beat computed tomography (CBCT)

    The level of alveolar bone around each implant will be assessed using CBCT. The vertical bone change (distance from the implant platform to the first bone-to-implant contact, in mm) around each implant will be assessed at the buccal, lingual, mesial and distal aspects then the mean will be calculated.

    Time frame: 3 months

  16. Radiographic evaluation of alveolar bone using cone beat computed tomography (CBCT)

    The level of alveolar bone around each implant will be assessed using CBCT. The vertical bone change (distance from the implant platform to the first bone-to-implant contact, in mm) around each implant will be assessed at the buccal, lingual, mesial and distal aspects then the mean will be calculated.

    Time frame: 6 months

  17. Radiographic evaluation of alveolar bone using cone beat computed tomography (CBCT)

    The level of alveolar bone around each implant will be assessed using CBCT. The vertical bone change (distance from the implant platform to the first bone-to-implant contact, in mm) around each implant will be assessed at the buccal, lingual, mesial and distal aspects then the mean will be calculated.

    Time frame: 12 months

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University
    Alexandria, 21512, Egypt
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 4, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04329156
Lead sponsor
Nourhan M.Aly
Collaborators
Alexandria University
Responsible party
Nourhan M.Aly (Dental Public Health clinical instructor and study statistician, University of Alexandria) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
Apr 1, 2020
Start date
Jan 25, 2020
Primary completion
May 1, 2021
Completion
Jul 22, 2021
Last update
Dec 4, 2023

Study contacts

Muhammed Badee, M.Sc
principal investigator · Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
Mohamed M Khamis, PhD
study chair · Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
Ahmed A Abdelhakim, PhD
study chair · Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
Rania Abdelaziz, PhD
study chair · Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion