An interventional study of Intraoral Scanner - Standard Protocol and Intraoral Scanner with Geometric Reference Pattern in Edentulous Jaw, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported and Prosthodontics, sponsored by Mirna ashraf anis heneen. Completed at 1 site in Egypt. Open to participants aged 30 Years to 70 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-15.
Sponsored by Mirna ashraf anis heneen · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic
Among 25 studies in Jaw, Edentulous with a site in Egypt — 3 open to participants now, 7 under way, none of them phase 3. Jaw, Edentulous · Egypt.
Among the 25 studies in Jaw, Edentulous with a site in Egypt, this one is the 23rd largest by enrollment of the 23 interventional ones that give a count, is one of 3 that started in 2025, is one of 23 with no phase, and was the 17th registered.
122 studies on the registry are indexed under Jaw, Edentulous; 20 are open to participants now.
Browse Jaw, Edentulous studies →3 of the 25 studies in Jaw, Edentulous with a site in Egypt are open now. Recruiting first, the newest first:
Mansoura University · Sites in Egypt
Ages 35–70
Cairo University · Sites in Egypt
Ages 40+ · Healthy volunteers
Al-Azhar University · Sites in Egypt
Ages 50–65 · Healthy volunteers
A study can be open while its sites in Egypt have not opened yet or have stopped. Only those recruiting at a site in Egypt →
Of the 9 Jaw, Edentulous studies recruiting now, 4 set no upper age limit and 4 stop at 75 or younger; 1 takes children under 18; 5 take healthy volunteers.
This study: 30 Years to 70 Years · all sexes · healthy volunteers too.
The full table on the hub →This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.
25 studies; the count open now beside each. This study's row is marked.
First in 2018; this study’s year is marked. 3 started in 2025.
This study's enrollment of 4 is below the median of 24 across 99 interventional studies indexed under Jaw, Edentulous.
Median enrollment 20 across the 23 interventional studies, 27 across the 2 observational. Of the 17 that completed or were terminated, 0 (0%) have results posted.
This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.
None of the 25 has an industry lead sponsor. The 10 most frequent:
This is the only study on the registry with Mirna ashraf anis heneen as lead sponsor.
Mirna ashraf anis heneen has 1 study filed under Jaw, Edentulous — fewer than ten, so there is no comparison to draw.
1 of the studies in Jaw, Edentulous with a site in Egypt that are under way reach primary completion within a year, 0 of them phase 3. Phase 3 first, then by date:
| Study | Primary completion |
|---|---|
| NCT07821905Menoufia UniversityAccuracy of Complete-arch Implant Scans Obtained Using T-Marker | 2027-02-01 |
Add it to your calendar (.ics) → With an account.
Among the 25 studies in Jaw, Edentulous with a site in Egypt, from their registry updates:
This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.
This clinical trial aims to compare three different impression techniques used to fabricate full-arch implant-supported dental prostheses. Accurate impressions are essential to ensure a passive and precise fit of the final prosthetic framework, which contributes to long-term implant success and patient comfort.
In this crossover study, participants with four osseointegrated dental implants in the lower jaw will undergo three types of impressions:
Conventional splinted impression using polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) material.
Standard digital impression using an intraoral scanner.
Geometric pattern-assisted digital impression, which incorporates a visual reference pattern to improve scan alignment and accuracy.
Each participant will receive all three impression techniques in a randomized sequence, at different time points. The accuracy of each method will be assessed by evaluating the passivity of the resulting prosthetic frameworks using two methods: (1) digital superimposition analysis to measure three-dimensional (3D) spatial deviation, and (2) the clinical "one-screw test" to detect misfit.
The study seeks to determine whether digital scanning, particularly with geometric pattern assistance, can provide accuracy comparable to or better than conventional methods. Findings may guide improvements in digital prosthodontic workflows and support more efficient, predictable treatment outcomes.
This is a prospective, crossover clinical trial designed to evaluate and compare the accuracy of three different impression techniques used in the fabrication of full-arch implant-supported prosthesis frameworks. The study includes four participants, each with four osseointegrated dental implants in the mandibular arch.
The three impression techniques being compared are:
Conventional Splinted Impressions: A traditional method utilizing rigidly splinted impression copings and polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression material to capture implant positions.
Standard Digital Scanning: A fully digital technique using an intraoral scanner and scan bodies placed on the implants to generate a digital impression.
Geometric Pattern-Assisted Digital Scanning: An enhanced digital method incorporating a geometric reference pattern during the scanning process to improve stitching accuracy and reduce scan distortion across the arch.
Each participant will receive all three impression techniques in a randomized sequence to minimize order bias. Digital models will be generated from each impression method, and test frameworks will be designed using computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology. These frameworks will be fabricated using 3D laser sintering.
The primary outcome of the study is the assessment of accuracy, defined as the mean three-dimensional (3D) deviation between the test scan and a reference scan, measured via digital superimposition software. A secondary outcome is clinical passivity, evaluated using the one-screw test to detect any misfit between the framework and implant interfaces.
The results of this study aim to provide clinical evidence regarding the accuracy and feasibility of advanced digital impression techniques, particularly the use of geometric pattern references, in full-arch implant prosthodontics. This may support improvements in digital workflow reliability, patient outcomes, and prosthetic longevity.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Adults aged 30 to 70 years
Completely edentulous mandible
Presence of four osseointegrated implants in the lower jaw
Good oral and general health
Willingness to participate and provide written
Availability for all study appointments
Exclusion Criteria:
Systemic diseases or conditions that affect bone healing or implant integration
Presence of oral inflammation, infection, or soft tissue abnormalities at implant sites
History of bruxism or parafunctional habits
Inability to understand or comply with study procedures
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Participants will undergo a conventional impression technique using open-tray impression copings rigidly splinted with DuraLay resin. The impression is taken using polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) material in a custom tray. This method serves as the control for comparison with digital techniques.
Procedure: Conventional Splinted Impression Technique
Participants will undergo a full-arch digital scan using an intraoral scanner. Scan bodies will be attached to the multi-unit abutments, and the scan will be performed without any additional geometric reference aids.
Device: Intraoral Scanner - Standard Protocol
Participants will undergo a full-arch digital scan using an intraoral scanner, with the addition of a geometric reference pattern placed in the scanning field to improve stitching accuracy and scan reliability.
Device: Intraoral Scanner with Geometric Reference Pattern
A full-arch digital impression is obtained using a high-precision intraoral scanner. Scan bodies are placed on multi-unit abutments and scanned without the use of external reference markers or geometric aids. The scan follows the manufacturer-recommended scanning path to capture the complete arch. This serves as a baseline digital technique for comparison with geometric pattern-assisted scanning.
The same intraoral scanner is used, but with an additional geometric reference pattern introduced in the scanning field to improve stitching accuracy and alignment of the digital scan.
A physical impression is taken using open-tray impression copings splinted with DuraLay resin and polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) material in a custom tray, according to conventional protocols for full-arch implant prostheses.
Mean 3D deviation (in microns) between test and reference scans using digital superimposition.
Accuracy will be assessed by digitally superimposing the scan obtained from each method (conventional splinted impression, standard digital scan, geometric pattern-assisted digital scan) onto a reference scan (conventional method). Specialized software will calculate the mean 3D deviation in microns to quantify spatial accuracy. Lower deviation indicates higher accuracy.
Time frame: Immediately after each impression session (Day 0 for each method).
Number of frameworks exhibiting passive fit as determined by the one-screw test.
Clinical assessment of framework passivity will be performed using the one-screw test. A passive fit will be recorded if no lifting or rocking is observed upon tightening a single screw at one end of the framework while the others remain untightened. Count and percentage of frameworks with passive fit will be reported.
Time frame: Within 1 hour of framework placement following each impression method.
Plan to share: Yes — De-identified individual participant data (IPD), including digital scan accuracy values and framework fit results, will be made available upon reasonable request after publication of the study results. Data will be shared with qualified researchers for academic and non-commercial purposes only, subject to ethical approval and data-sharing agreements.
Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Informed consent form, Clinical study report
Time frame: Beginning 6 months after publication of the study results and for up to 5 years.
Access criteria: De-identified individual participant data (IPD) and supporting materials (study protocol, statistical analysis plan, and informed consent form) will be available to qualified researchers affiliated with academic institutions or non-profit organizations. Access will be granted for non-commercial, ethically approved research purposes. Interested researchers must submit a formal request to the Principal Investigator via email, including a research proposal and institutional ethical approval. Access will be provided through secure, password-protected file sharing platforms.
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Ran from Sep 2025 to primary completion in Jul 2026, 9 months.
Of 58 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Jaw, Edentulous, half reached primary completion within 17 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 11 and three quarters within 30. This study's 9 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 66 studies reached it within 20 months; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 38.
Since we started tracking on Sep 25, 2026, the dates moved once, on Oct 15, 2026: primary completion Sep 2026 → Jul 2026 and completion Sep 2026 → Jul 2026.
Earlier changes are on the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions 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.