PEEK Bar Versus Titanium Bar Fabricated by CAD-CAM in Mandibular Hybrid Prostheses: A Comparative Study

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Edentulous Jaw
• Interventions: Procedure: implant placement

• Registration Number: NCT06201169
• Lead Sponsor: Amr Azab Abd El-Fattah

Brief Summary

CAD/CAM-fabricated PEEK bar exhibited greater dimensional deviation in comparison to its titanium counterpart. Nevertheless, patients with PEEK bars reported higher satisfaction levels and lower marginal bone loss when compared to those with titanium bars.

Detailed Description

Fourteen patients with completely edentulous mandibular arch opposing natural dentition were selected and divided into two groups, seven patients in each. All patients received implant-supported hybrid prostheses with a bar fabricated by CAD/CAM milling technique. In group I (control), bar was fabricated from titanium, while in group ӀӀ, the bar was fabricated from PEEK. The evaluation of the study was done at 6 and 12 follow-up periods according to the following: 1- Experimentally by Geomagic (Geomagic, Japan) to detect any dimensional deviation of PEEK bars compared to titanium bars. 2-Clinically by questionnaire to evaluate the patient satisfaction. 3- Radiographically (digital periapical) to measure marginal bone loss around the implants.

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2021-04-15
• Primary Completion: 2022-05-20
• Study Completion: 2023-04-25
• Study First Submitted: 2023-12-30
• Study First Submitted QC: 2023-12-30
• Status Verified: 2024-01
• Last Update Submitted: 2024-01-10
• Study First Posted: 2024-01-11
• Last Update Posted: 2024-01-12

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 14

Inclusion Criteria

• Completely edentulous mandibular arch for at least six months have almost of the natural teeth in the maxillary arch with a ranged of age from 40- 60 years old.

and normal class Ӏ maxilla-mandibular relationship with a minimum 12-15 mm inter-arch space

Exclusion Criteria

• All patient had systemic disorders that may influence soft or hard tissue healing were excluded as:

  • History of radiation therapy in the head and neck region.
  • Active infection or inflammation or flabby tissue in the mandibular arch
  • Bone diseases as osteoporosis.
  • Clenching or bruxism, temporomandibular joint troubles
  • Neurological or psychiatric handicap conditions that could interfere with good oral hygiene.
  • Heavy smoking and drug abusing

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
group I (control)	implant placement	The bars are fabricated from titanium. the participants received implant supported hybrid prosthesis with CAD/CAM fabricated titanium bars
group II	implant placement	The bars are fabricated from PEEK . the participants received implant supported hybrid prosthesis with CAD/CAM fabricated PEEK bars

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Radiographically (digital periapical)	six and twelve months	marginal bone loss around the implants

Trial Locations

Locations (2)

Faculty of dentistry tanta university; 🇪🇬 Al Gharbī Bahjūrah, Tanta, Egypt

Tanta University; 🇪🇬 Al Gharbī Bahjūrah, Tanta, Egypt