Comparison of Non-grafted Socket Shield Technique With Guided Bone Regeneration in Immediate Implant Placement

Kutahya Health Sciences University1 site in 1 country24 target enrollmentNovember 1, 2019

ConditionsImmediate Implant Placement

Overview

Phase: Not Applicable
Intervention: Not specified
Conditions: Immediate Implant Placement
Sponsor: Kutahya Health Sciences University
Enrollment: 24
Locations: 1
Primary Endpoint: Modified bleeding index
Status: Completed
Last Updated: 2 years ago

Overview Investigators Eligibility Criteria Outcomes Sites Similar Trials

Overview

Brief Summary

Among the individuals who applied to the Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Health Sciences University between 2019 and 2021, patients with an unrestorable tooth in the maxillary esthetic region and required implant placement were included in this randomized clinical trial. Before implant surgery, patients were randomized into socket shield technique and guided bone regeneration groups. While the buccal gap was untreated in the socket shield group, a xenograft, and membrane were applied in the regeneration group. Peri-implant pocket depth, modified plaque index, modified bleeding index, keratinized mucosa width, and mucosal thickness were recorded at the permanent restoration and the postoperative first year. Horizontal bone level and vertical bone level were assessed with cone beam computed tomography images taken before the surgery and one year after prosthesis insertion. The pink esthetic score was evaluated with intraoral photographs taken before the surgical procedure and first-year follow-up.

Detailed Description

This study aimed to compare the non-grafted socket shield technique with simultaneously guided bone regeneration in immediate implant placement in terms of clinical, esthetic, and radiographic parameters. Within the scope, immediate implant placement was applied to randomized groups (socket shield technique and guided bone regeneration). Immediate implant placement was performed following shield preparation in the shield group, and guided bone regeneration was applied in the regeneration group. A temporary non-functional immediate prosthesis was inserted at the same visit. After four months, permanent restorations were applied. Clinical, radiographic, and esthetic parameters were compared between two groups at baseline and first-year follow-up.

Registry

clinicaltrials.gov

Start Date

November 1, 2019

End Date

January 20, 2023

Last Updated

2 years ago

Study Type

Interventional

Study Design

Parallel

Sex

All

Investigators

Sponsor

Kutahya Health Sciences University

Responsible Party

Principal Investigator

Ezgi Gürbüz

Assistant Professor

Kutahya Health Sciences University

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

•Patients with the health status of American Society of Anesthesiologists class I or II,
•Nonsmokers,
•Unrestorable single-rooted tooth in the maxillary esthetic region,
•Periodontally healthy, non-mobile teeth,
•Single implant placement,
•Minimum 3-5 mm available vertical bone apical to the apex,
•Intact socket wall after extraction.

Exclusion Criteria

•Medically compromised patients, especially uncontrolled diabetes,
•Psychiatric problems,
•Pregnancy, lactation, or suspicion of pregnancy,
•A history of radiation therapy to the head and neck region or immunosuppressive therapy,
•Metabolic bone disorder or the presence of drugs known to affect bone metabolism,
•Poor plaque control,
•Vertical root fracture on the buccal surface or a horizontal fracture below the bone level,
•External or internal resorption affecting the buccal part of the root,
•Acute infection in the area intended for implant placement,
•Refusal to attend follow-up appointments.