ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07315607Updated Jan 9, 2026

In Vivo Evaluation of the Accuracy of Immediate Screw-Retained Provisional Crowns Fabricated Using Digital Planning and Guided Surgery

An interventional study of Fully Guided Implant Placement and Immediate Provisionalization in Partial Edentulism and Tooth Loss / Rehabilitation, sponsored by Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Recruiting at 1 site in Spain. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-01-09.

Sponsored by Universidad Complutense de Madrid · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Jul 2026, 4 months ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
27
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This clinical trial aims to evaluate the in vivo accuracy of a fully digital workflow for the immediate placement of a previously fabricated screw-retained provisional crown using digital planning and guided implant surgery. The study will be conducted in partially edentulous adult patients requiring the replacement of a single tooth with an immediately loaded dental implant.

The main objective of the study is to assess the accuracy (trueness and precision) of the planned digital implant position and provisional restoration by comparing the virtually planned position with the actual clinical outcome after guided surgery. Emphasis will be placed on linear, angular, and rotational deviations at both the implant and provisional restoration levels.

Participants will undergo a fully guided implant placement procedure with rotational control, followed by the immediate placement of a prefabricated screw-retained provisional crown designed during the digital planning phase. Postoperative intraoral scans will be obtained to register the final implant and restoration positions.

The planned and achieved positions will be compared using three-dimensional analysis software to quantify deviations and determine whether the accuracy achieved remains within clinically acceptable limits.

Read the detailed description

Background Computer-guided implant surgery has consolidated a prosthetically driven approach, in which implant positioning is planned according to the definitive or provisional restoration. The integration of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and intraoral scanning allows for virtual planning of implant position, axis, and prosthetic emergence. However, the accurate transfer of the digital plan to the clinical setting remains subject to cumulative errors throughout the digital and surgical workflow.

Accuracy in guided implant surgery is commonly assessed by comparing the planned and postoperative implant positions using linear and angular deviation metrics. From a clinical perspective, the accuracy at the level of the provisional restoration is of particular relevance, as the restoration must seat passively without requiring significant adjustment. This requirement becomes especially critical when an immediate prefabricated screw-retained provisional crown is placed at the time of surgery, as both positional and rotational accuracy are essential for proper seating.

Recent digital workflows have demonstrated the feasibility of designing and fabricating immediate provisional restorations prior to surgery. The use of guided surgical protocols incorporating rotational control aims to reproduce the planned implant orientation and facilitate the immediate placement of prefabricated restorations. However, the accuracy achievable with such workflows has not been sufficiently quantified in clinical settings.

Justification Despite advances in guided surgery and digital manufacturing, limited clinical evidence exists regarding the accuracy of workflows that combine fully guided implant placement with rotational control and the immediate placement of a prefabricated screw-retained provisional crown. Quantifying plan-to-actual deviations at both the implant and restoration levels is essential to determine the clinical feasibility, predictability, and potential optimization of this protocol.

Study Design This is a prospective, single-arm interventional clinical trial with an intraindividual comparison between the digitally planned implant and provisional restoration positions and the actual clinical outcomes obtained after guided surgery.

Participants The study population will consist of partially edentulous patients aged 18 years or older who require the replacement of a single tooth with an immediately loaded dental implant. All participants must meet the predefined inclusion criteria and none of the exclusion criteria and must provide written informed consent prior to participation.

Intervention All participants will undergo a fully digital workflow including CBCT acquisition, intraoral scanning, virtual implant planning, and the design and fabrication of a surgical guide and a prefabricated screw-retained provisional crown. Implant placement will be performed using a fully guided surgical protocol with rotational control. The provisional restoration will be placed immediately after implant insertion and kept free of occlusal contacts.

Outcome Assessment Postoperative intraoral scans will be obtained with a scan body and with the provisional restoration in place. Three-dimensional analysis software will be used to compare the planned and achieved positions. Linear and angular deviations at the coronal and apical implant levels, as well as deviations of the provisional restoration, will be calculated to assess accuracy in terms of trueness and precision.

Statistical Analysis Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize the deviation measurements. Normality will be assessed, and appropriate parametric or non-parametric tests will be applied to determine whether the observed deviations differ significantly from clinically acceptable thresholds.

02

Conditions studied

  • Partial Edentulism
  • Tooth Loss / Rehabilitation

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Immediate provisionalization
  • Screw-retained provisional crown
  • Guided implant surgery
  • Digital implant planning
03

In context

Tooth Loss

165 studies on the registry are indexed under Tooth Loss; 44 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 27 is close to the median of 30 across 120 interventional studies indexed under Tooth Loss.

Browse Tooth Loss studies →

Lead sponsor

Universidad Complutense de Madrid is the lead sponsor of 206 studies on the registry; 64 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

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.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Adults aged 18 years or older.
  2. Partially edentulous patients requiring replacement of a single tooth with an immediately loaded dental implant.
  3. Patients classified as or ASA II according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification.
  4. Patients with clinical conditions allowing immediate implant placement with a minimum primary stability of ≥25 Ncm.
  5. Ability to understand the study procedures and provide written .
  6. Willingness to comply with the study protocol and attend required clinical visits.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients classified as or ASA IV, or with uncontrolled systemic conditions that may interfere with study participation.
  2. Presence of psychiatric or cognitive disorders that may compromise or protocol compliance.
  3. Inability to comply with the visit schedule or required evaluations.
  4. Any other condition that, in the investigator's judgment, could compromise patient safety, protocol adherence, or data validity.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

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.

ASA physical status

The anaesthetists’ scale of health before surgery: I is healthy, II has a mild illness that is under control, III a severe one, IV a severe illness that is a constant threat to life. V and VI are used for the critically ill and for organ donors.

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.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
27 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Fully Guided Implant Surgery With Immediate Prefabricated Provisional Crown

    Participants will undergo a fully guided implant placement procedure with rotational control, followed by the immediate placement of a previously fabricated screw-retained provisional crown designed during the digital planning phase.

    Procedure: Fully Guided Implant Placement and Immediate Provisionalization

Interventions

  • ProcedureFully Guided Implant Placement and Immediate Provisionalization

    Fully guided implant placement using a digitally designed surgical guide with rotational control, followed by immediate placement of a prefabricated screw-retained provisional crown based on the virtual treatment plan.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Accuracy of Implant and Provisional Crown Placement

    Accuracy will be assessed as the combination of trueness and precision by quantifying plan-to-actual deviations between the digitally planned and clinically achieved implant position and provisional crown position. Linear deviations at the coronal and apical implant levels, angular deviation of the implant axis, and linear and angular deviations of the provisional restoration will be calculated using three-dimensional analysis software.

    Time frame: Immediate postoperative period

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Complutense University of Madrid
    Madrid, Madrid 28040, Spain
    Recruiting
    • Miguel A Gomez Polo; DSS, PhD, DSS, PhD · Contactmgomezpo@ucm.es
    • Solange J Vasquez Ramos, DDS, MSc · Sub investigator
    • Juan Ballesteros Martinez, DDS, MSc · Sub investigator
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Adams CR, Ammoun R, Deeb GR, Bencharit S. Influence of Metal Guide Sleeves on the Accuracy and Precision of Dental Implant Placement Using Guided Implant Surgery: An In Vitro Study. J Prosthodont. 2023 Jan;32(1):62-70. doi: 10.1111/jopr.13503. Epub 2022 Mar 22. PubMed 35257456 ↗
  • Ballesteros J, Vasquez-Ramos S, Revilla-Leon M, Gomez-Polo M. Immediate placement of a previously manufactured interim screw-retained implant-supported crown by using the implant position determined in the guided implant planning. J Prosthet Dent. 2025 Oct;134(4):908-913. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.07.009. Epub 2025 Jul 30. PubMed 40744851 ↗
  • Yeager B, Cakmak G, Zheng F, Johnston WM, Yilmaz B. Error analysis of stages involved in CBCT-guided implant placement with surgical guides when different printing technologies are used. J Prosthet Dent. 2024 Nov;132(5):995-1004. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.11.018. Epub 2023 Jan 21. PubMed 36690552 ↗
  • Younis H, Lv C, Xu B, Zhou H, Du L, Liao L, Zhao N, Long W, Elayah SA, Chang X, He L. Accuracy of dynamic navigation compared to static surgical guides and the freehand approach in implant placement: a prospective clinical study. Head Face Med. 2024 May 14;20(1):30. doi: 10.1186/s13005-024-00433-1. PubMed 38745297 ↗
  • Espona J, Roig E, Ali A, Roig M. Immediately loaded interim complete-arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses fabricated with a completely digital workflow: A clinical technique. J Prosthet Dent. 2020 Oct;124(4):423-427. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.08.008. Epub 2019 Dec 18. PubMed 31862143 ↗
  • Hernandez-Margarit P, Palacios-Banuelos R, Roig M, Altuna P, Blasi A. Digital workflow for designing an interim implant-supported restoration with an optimal emergence profile in an open-source software program. J Prosthet Dent. 2024 Nov;132(5):857-862. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2022.10.013. Epub 2022 Dec 6. PubMed 36494239 ↗
  • Shah NP, Khanna A, Pai AR, Sheth VH, Raut SR. An evaluation of virtually planned and 3D-printed stereolithographic surgical guides from CBCT and digital scans: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2022 Sep;128(3):436-442. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.12.035. Epub 2021 Feb 12. PubMed 33583616 ↗
  • Chen Z, Li J, Ceolin Meneghetti P, Galli M, Mendonca G, Wang HL. Does guided level (fully or partially) influence implant placement accuracy at post-extraction sockets and healed sites? An in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Aug;26(8):5449-5458. doi: 10.1007/s00784-022-04512-y. Epub 2022 May 2. PubMed 35499656 ↗
  • Werny JG, Frank K, Fan S, Sagheb K, Al-Nawas B, Narh CT, Schiegnitz E. Freehand vs. computer-aided implant surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis-part 1: accuracy of planned and placed implant position. Int J Implant Dent. 2025 May 2;11(1):35. doi: 10.1186/s40729-025-00622-w. PubMed 40314873 ↗
  • Putra RH, Yoda N, Astuti ER, Sasaki K. The accuracy of implant placement with computer-guided surgery in partially edentulous patients and possible influencing factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthodont Res. 2022 Jan 11;66(1):29-39. doi: 10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_20_00184. Epub 2021 Jan 26. PubMed 33504723 ↗
  • Khaohoen A, Powcharoen W, Sornsuwan T, Chaijareenont P, Rungsiyakull C, Rungsiyakull P. Accuracy of implant placement with computer-aided static, dynamic, and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials. BMC Oral Health. 2024 Mar 21;24(1):359. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-04033-y. PubMed 38509530 ↗
  • Lo Russo L, Ercoli C, Guida L, Merli M, Laino L. Surgical guides for dental implants: Measurement of the accuracy using a freeware metrology software program. J Prosthodont Res. 2023 Apr 12;67(2):300-304. doi: 10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_22_00069. Epub 2022 Aug 11. PubMed 35965064 ↗
  • Gomez-Polo M, Ballesteros J, Padilla PP, Pulido PP, Revilla-Leon M, Ortega R. Merging intraoral scans and CBCT: a novel technique for improving the accuracy of 3D digital models for implant-supported complete-arch fixed dental prostheses. Int J Comput Dent. 2021 Jun 4;24(2):117-123. PubMed 34085497 ↗
  • Derksen W, Wismeijer D, Flugge T, Hassan B, Tahmaseb A. The accuracy of computer-guided implant surgery with tooth-supported, digitally designed drill guides based on CBCT and intraoral scanning. A prospective cohort study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Oct;30(10):1005-1015. doi: 10.1111/clr.13514. Epub 2019 Sep 9. PubMed 31330566 ↗
  • Kernen F, Kramer J, Wanner L, Wismeijer D, Nelson K, Flugge T. A review of virtual planning software for guided implant surgery - data import and visualization, drill guide design and manufacturing. BMC Oral Health. 2020 Sep 10;20(1):251. doi: 10.1186/s12903-020-01208-1. PubMed 32912273 ↗
  • Shi Y, Wang J, Ma C, Shen J, Dong X, Lin D. A systematic review of the accuracy of digital surgical guides for dental implantation. Int J Implant Dent. 2023 Oct 25;9(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s40729-023-00507-w. PubMed 37875645 ↗
  • Bruno V, Badino M, Riccitiello F, Spagnuolo G, Amato M. Computer guided implantology accuracy and complications. Case Rep Dent. 2013;2013:701421. doi: 10.1155/2013/701421. Epub 2013 Sep 3. PubMed 24083034 ↗
  • Chackartchi T, Romanos GE, Parkanyi L, Schwarz F, Sculean A. Reducing errors in guided implant surgery to optimize treatment outcomes. Periodontol 2000. 2022 Feb;88(1):64-72. doi: 10.1111/prd.12411. PubMed 35103317 ↗
  • Nulty A. A literature review on prosthetically designed guided implant placement and the factors influencing dental implant success. Br Dent J. 2024 Feb;236(3):169-180. doi: 10.1038/s41415-024-7050-3. Epub 2024 Feb 9. PubMed 38332076 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — Individual participant data will not be shared due to ethical and privacy considerations. The data collected include detailed clinical and radiographic information that could potentially allow re-identification of participants, even after de-identification. Data will be used solely for the purposes defined in the approved study protocol.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jan 9, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07315607
Responsible party
Miguel Gómez Polo (Associate Professor of conservative dentistry and prosthodontics, Universidad Complutense de Madrid) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jan 2, 2026
Start date
Jan 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Jul 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Jan 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Jan 9, 2026

Study contacts

Miguel A Gómez Polo ; DDS, PhD, DDS, PhD
Contact
mgomezpo@ucm.es
+34659390001
Solange J Vasquez Ramos, DDS, MSc
Contact
solvasqu@ucm.es
Miguel A Gómez Polo, DDS, PhD
principal investigator · Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Juan Ballesteros- Martinez, DDs, MSc
principal investigator · Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Oversight

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

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

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