CClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07484685RIP-VEGAUpdated May 1, 2026

Reduced Time Interval for Implant Placement After Extraction Socket Preservation Using the Vega Plus Implants

An interventional study of Reduced time interval treatment protocol and Standard time interval treatment protocol in Alveolar Bone Loss and Tooth Extraction, sponsored by Universidad Catolica Santiago de Guayaquil. Recruiting at 1 site in Ecuador. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-05-01.

Sponsored by Universidad Catolica Santiago de Guayaquil · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
40
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This randomized controlled clinical trial aims to evaluate whether reducing the healing interval for implant placement after extraction socket preservation improves clinical and radiographic outcomes compared with the conventional waiting period. Participants requiring single-tooth extraction and implant therapy will be randomly assigned to implant placement either 4 months or 6 months after ridge preservation using the Vega Plus implant system (Klockner).

Clinical and radiographic assessments will be performed at baseline and during follow-up visits. The primary outcome will be the mean change in horizontal alveolar ridge width measured using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Secondary outcomes will include vertical bone height changes measured on CBCT, implant stability measured using resonance frequency analysis (ISQ values), marginal bone level changes assessed on standardized periapical radiographs, and postoperative pain assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS).

The results of this study may contribute to optimizing treatment timing and improving efficiency in implant dentistry while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes.

Read the detailed description

The optimal interval between treatment phases remains uncertain in several clinical settings. Traditional protocols often include a waiting period between phases to allow tissue healing or stabilization; however, prolonged intervals may extend overall treatment time and potentially affect patient adherence and outcomes. Emerging evidence suggests that reducing the interval between phases could maintain clinical effectiveness while improving efficiency and patient satisfaction. This randomized controlled trial will compare a reduced-interval protocol with a conventional-interval protocol. Eligible participants who require multi-phase treatment will be randomized into two groups: (1) reduced-interval treatment and (2) standard-interval treatment. Clinical examinations will be conducted at baseline and at scheduled follow-up visits according to the study protocol.

Primary outcomes will assess clinically relevant parameters associated with the treated condition. Secondary outcomes will evaluate treatment duration, patient-reported symptoms, and quality-of-life measures. Statistical analyses will compare outcomes between groups to determine whether the reduced-interval approach provides equivalent or improved results compared with the conventional schedule.

02

Conditions studied

  • Alveolar Bone Loss
  • Tooth Extraction

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Dental implant
  • Tooth extraction
  • Alveolar ridge preservation
  • Guided Bone Regeneration
  • Bone regeneration
  • Dental Implant Placement
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Age: ≥ 18 years.
  • Good general health.
  • Need of extraction of incisors, canines or premolars due to carious lesion, endodontic complication, root fracture or prosthetic reason.
  • Presence of three intact socket walls after tooth extraction with a defect of 50% or more of the buccal wall.
  • Need of single-tooth implant treatment, with presence of adjacent teeth and opposing occluding teeth (for measurement stent indexing).
  • Enough available bone assessed on CBCT to place implants with 3.6 mm diameter and 10 mm in length.
  • Periodontal health in intact or reduced periodontium.
  • Full-mouth plaque and bleeding scores \< 20%.
  • Able and willing to follow study procedures and instructions.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • \< 18 years.
  • Compromised health. Existence of any systemic condition such as uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, cancer, HIV, disorders that compromise wound healing, chronic high dose steroid therapy, intravenous and oral bisphosphonate therapy, bone metabolic diseases, history of irradiation of the head and neck area, or any other immunosuppressive therapy that would contraindicate oral surgical treatment.
  • Absence of any adjacent teeth or the opposing occluding teeth.
  • The hopeless tooth is a molar.
04

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
40 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Reduced time Interval treatment protocol

    Participants receive implant placement after extraction socket preservation using a reduced healing interval according to the experimental protocol.

    Procedure: Reduced time interval treatment protocol

  • Active comparator
    Standard Time Interval

    Participants receive treatment following the conventional interval protocol used in routine clinical practice.

    Procedure: Standard time interval treatment protocol

Interventions

  • ProcedureReduced time interval treatment protocol

    Participants receive treatment phases with a reduced time interval between sessions according to the experimental protocol in order to evaluate whether shortening the interval improves clinical outcomes and treatment efficiency.

  • ProcedureStandard time interval treatment protocol

    Participants receive implant placement after extraction socket preservation following the conventional healing interval used in routine clinical practice.

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Mean change in horizontal alveolar ridge width (mm) measured by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)

    Horizontal alveolar ridge width will be measured in millimeters using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Measurements will be obtained at three standardized levels (1 mm, 3 mm, and 5 mm below the crestal bone). Baseline and follow-up CBCT scans will be superimposed, and the mean change in ridge width (mm) between time points will be calculated.

    Time frame: Baseline (immediately after ridge preservation surgery) to 6 months after surgery (prior to implant placement)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Mean change in vertical alveolar bone height (mm) measured by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)

    Vertical alveolar bone height will be measured in millimeters using CBCT by determining the distance between the crestal bone (line C) and the apical reference line (line A). Baseline and follow-up CBCT scans will be superimposed, and the mean change in vertical bone height will be calculated.

    Time frame: Baseline (immediately after ridge preservation surgery) to 6 months after surgery (prior to implant placement)

  2. Mean implant stability quotient (ISQ) measured using resonance frequency analysis (Osstell IDx)

    Implant stability will be measured using resonance frequency analysis with the Osstell IDx device. Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) values will be recorded in mesiodistal and buccolingual directions, and the mean ISQ value will be calculated for each implant.

    Time frame: Implant placement to prosthetic loading (approximately 3 months)

  3. Mean marginal bone level change (mm) measured on standardized periapical radiographs

    Marginal bone levels will be measured using standardized digital periapical radiographs obtained with a parallel technique and individualized film holders. The distance from the implant-abutment junction to the first bone-to-implant contact will be measured mesially and distally, and the mean marginal bone level change will be calculated.

    Time frame: Implant placement to 2 years after prosthetic loading

  4. Mean postoperative pain score measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS, 0-10)

    Postoperative pain will be assessed using the Visual Analog Scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain). The mean pain score will be calculated.

    Time frame: 24 hours to 14 days after implant placement surgery

06

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Universidad Catolica Santiago de Guayaquil- Carrera de Odontologia de La Ucsg
    Guayaquil, Guayas 090101, Ecuador
    • GABRIELA GUADALUPE ZAMBRANO MANZABA, DDS · Contact · gabriela.manzaba30@gmail.com · +1 9546298543
    • GABRIELA ZAMBRANO MANZABA, DDS · Contact · gabriela.manzaba30@gmail.com · 9546298543
    • GABRIELA G ZAMBRANO MANZABA, DDS · Principal investigator
    • MANUEL TOLEDANO PEREZ, DDS · Sub investigator
    • RAQUEL OSORIO RUIZ, DDS · Sub investigator
    • MANUEL TOLEDANO OSORIO, DDS · Sub investigator
    • MARIA C VALLECILLO, DDS · Sub investigator
    • JAVIER GIL, DDS · Sub investigator
    • HECTOR A LEMA GUTIERREZ, DDS · Sub investigator
    • ALEJANDRA TORRES SOSA, DDM · Sub investigator
    Recruiting
07

References and documents

Publications

  • Brånemark PI, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T. Tissue-integrated prostheses: osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Quintessence Publishing; 1985.
  • Juodzbalys G, Stumbras A, Goyushov S, Duruel O, Tozum TF. Morphological Classification of Extraction Sockets and Clinical Decision Tree for Socket Preservation/Augmentation after Tooth Extraction: a Systematic Review. J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2019 Sep 5;10(3):e3. doi: 10.5037/jomr.2019.10303. eCollection 2019 Jul-Sep. PubMed 31620265 ↗
  • Jung RE, Philipp A, Annen BM, Signorelli L, Thoma DS, Hammerle CH, Attin T, Schmidlin P. Radiographic evaluation of different techniques for ridge preservation after tooth extraction: a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol. 2013 Jan;40(1):90-8. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12027. Epub 2012 Nov 19. PubMed 23163915 ↗
  • Araujo MG, Silva CO, Misawa M, Sukekava F. Alveolar socket healing: what can we learn? Periodontol 2000. 2015 Jun;68(1):122-34. doi: 10.1111/prd.12082. PubMed 25867983 ↗
  • Hammerle CH, Araujo MG, Simion M; Osteology Consensus Group 2011. Evidence-based knowledge on the biology and treatment of extraction sockets. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Feb;23 Suppl 5:80-2. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02370.x. PubMed 22211307 ↗
  • Tan WL, Wong TL, Wong MC, Lang NP. A systematic review of post-extractional alveolar hard and soft tissue dimensional changes in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Feb;23 Suppl 5:1-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02375.x. PubMed 22211303 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — De-identified individual participant data (IPD) that underlie the results reported in publications will be shared with qualified researchers upon reasonable request after publication of the study results.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap, Icf

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07484685
Lead sponsor
Universidad Catolica Santiago de Guayaquil
Collaborators
Klockner Implant System S.A.
Responsible party
Gabriela Guadalupe Zambrano Manzaba (Specialist in Periodontology, Universidad Catolica Santiago de Guayaquil) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 20, 2026
Start date
Feb 28, 2026
Primary completion
Dec 30, 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Feb 27, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
May 1, 2026

Study contacts

GABRIELA GUADALUPE ZAMBRANO MANZABA, DDS
Contact
gabriela.manzaba30@gmail.com
+19546298543

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
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