Aesthetic outcome, clinical performance, patient perception, and cost-time efficiency of implant-supported single crowns under the influence of the prosthetic workflow - a randomized clinical study in the aesthetic zone
Summary description of the study
In this study, we compare three different workflows for the creation of the implant reconstruction. We aim to find out which of the three different workflows achieves the best overall aesthetic outcome and the best clinical performance. Furthermore, time and cost expenditure and patient-related outcomes of the three different therapeutic options are compared.
(BASEC)
Intervention under investigation
In our study, participants are randomly assigned to 3 groups.
• Group A receives a zirconia healing cap for 2 weeks in the first step. This is followed by a provisional phase with soft tissue conditioning according to the dynamic compression technique for three months. The definitive reconstruction is made from a custom CAD/CAM-fabricated zirconia abutment, which is individualized with customized hand-built ceramics.
• Group B receives a titanium healing cap for two weeks, without a subsequent provisional phase. The definitive reconstruction consists of a monolithic ceramic crown, which is individualized through extrinsic coloring and cemented onto a Variobase abutment.
• Group C receives a CAD/CAM-fabricated individual mucosa former made of zirconia for 3 months, without a subsequent provisional phase. The definitive reconstruction is made from a custom CAD/CAM-fabricated zirconia abutment, which is individualized with customized hand-built ceramics.
(BASEC)
Disease under investigation
Implant reconstruction
(BASEC)
1. Participants must have voluntarily signed the informed consent before each study-related procedure. 2. Male and female participants who are at least 18 years old 3. Implant axis compatible with transocclusal screw retention (screw access palatinal to the incisal edges) (BASEC)
Exclusion criteria
1. Systemic diseases that would interfere with dental implant therapy (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes, i.v. bisphosphonate intake) 2. Local radiation therapy in the head and neck area in the medical history 3. Patients who smoke more than 10 cigarettes or tobacco equivalents per day or chew tobacco (BASEC)
Trial sites
Zurich
(BASEC)
Sponsor
Center of Dental Medicine, Clinic of Reconstructive Dentistry
(BASEC)
Contact
Contact Person Switzerland
Prof. Dr. Daniel Thoma
+44634 04 04
daniel.thoma@clutterzzm.uzh.chCenter of Dental Medicine, Clinic of Reconstructive Dentistry
(BASEC)
General Information
Zentrum fr Zahnmedizin, Klinik fr Rekonstruktive Zahnmedizin
+41 44 634 43 05
daniel.thoma@clutterzzm.uzh.ch(ICTRP)
Scientific Information
Zentrum f?r Zahnmedizin, Klinik f?r Rekonstruktive Zahnmedizin
+41 44 634 43 05
daniel.thoma@clutterzzm.uzh.ch(ICTRP)
Name of the authorising ethics committee (for multicentre studies, only the lead committee)
Ethics Committee Zurich
(BASEC)
Date of authorisation
19.06.2023
(BASEC)
ICTRP Trial ID
DRKS00032124 (ICTRP)
Official title (approved by ethics committee)
Esthetic Outcome, Clinical Performance, Patient Perception and Cost-Time Efficiency of Implant-supported Single Crowns influenced by the Prosthetic Workflow – a Random-ized Clinical Trial in the Esthetic Zone (BASEC)
Academic title
Esthetic Outcome, Clinical Performance, Patient Perception and Cost-Time Efficiency of Implant-supported Single Crowns influenced by the Prosthetic Workflow a Randomized Clinical Trial in the Esthetic Zone - Ceramic Esthetic (ICTRP)
Public title
Esthetic Outcome, Clinical Performance, Patient Perception and Cost-Time Efficiency of Implant-supported Single Crowns influenced by the Prosthetic Workflow a Randomized Clinical Trial in the Esthetic Zone (ICTRP)
Disease under investigation
Missing tooth, single tooth gap (ICTRP)
Intervention under investigation
Group 1: Using a zirconium dioxide healing abutment, a provisional phase with soft tissue conditioning following the dynamic compression technique, a customized CAD/CAM designed abutment made of zirconium dioxide and veneered with individualized hand- build up ceramic.
Group 2: Using a titanium healing abutment, no provisional phase and a direct finalization of the crown with a Vario Base Abutment using monolithic ceramic which is individualized by extrinsic staining.
Group 3: Using a CAD/CAM designed individual mucosa former made of zirconium dioxide for 3 months, no provisional phase, the crown is finalized with a customized CAD/CAM designed abutment made of zirconium dioxide and veneered with individualized hand- build up ceramic. (ICTRP)
Type of trial
interventional (ICTRP)
Trial design
Allocation: Randomized controlled study; Masking: Open (masking not used); Control: active; Assignment: parallel; Study design purpose: treatment (ICTRP)
Inclusion/Exclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. Die Probanden mssen vor jeder studienbezogenen Handlung freiwillig die Einverstndniserklrung unterzeichnet haben.
2. Erfolgreich osseointegriertes Straumann-Einzelzahnimplantat auf Knochenniveau 4,1 mm (BL/BLT), das mindestens 8 Wochen nach der Zahnextraktion eingesetzt wurde
3. Implantatachse kompatibel mit transokklusaler Schraubenretention (Schraubenzugang palatinal der Inzisalkanten) (ICTRP)
Exclusion criteria: 1. Systemic disease that would interfere with dental implant therapy (e.g. uncontrolled diabetes, i.v. bisphosphonate intake)
2. Any contraindications for oral surgical procedures
3. History of local irradiation therapy in the head-neck area
4. Patients who smoke >10 cigarettes per day or tobacco equivalents or chew tobacco
5. Subjects who have undergone administration of any investigational device within 30 days of enrolment in the study
6. Conditions or circumstances, in the opinion of the investigator, which would prevent completion of study participation or interfere with analysis of study results, such as history of non-compliance or unreliability
7. Physical or mental handicaps that would interfere with the ability to perform adequate oral hygiene
8. Pregnant or breastfeeding women
9. Existing implants in the adjacent position
10. Removable dentures in the opposing dentition
11. Patients with inadequate oral hygiene (Periodontal examination PGU > 2) or unmotivated for adequate home care
12. Lack of primary stability of the implant
13. Inappropriate implant position for a screw-retained restoration
14. Severe bruxing or clenching habits
Primary and secondary end points
To compare the influence of the prosthetic workflow on the overall esthetic outcome: PES/WES index at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years. (ICTRP)
Time (in min) and cost (in CHF) analysis of fabrication of final implant crowns
�Crestal bone level changes at the implant site (mesial and distal) between baseline and 1, 3, 5 years
�Implant survival rate at baseline, 1, 3, 5 years
�Mechanical complications / failures at baseline,1, 3, 5 years
�Technical complications / failures at baseline,1, 3, 5 years
�Plaque assessments on healing abutments
�Clinical Parameters: Examination of standard peri-implant soft tissue parameters (mod Pl, BOP, PD, KM) at six sites of each implant (except KM: only buccal) at baseline, 1, 3, 5 years
�PICI-Index after baseline, 1, 3, 5 years
�Patient questionnaires (PROMs Prothetik) after baseline, 1, 3, 5 years using numerical rating scale (NRS) and OHIP-G14 questionnaire
(ICTRP)
Registration date
22.06.2023 (ICTRP)
Incorporation of the first participant
14.08.2024 (ICTRP)
Secondary sponsors
not available
Additional contacts
Daniel Thoma, daniel.thoma@zzm.uzh.ch, +41 44 634 43 05, Zentrum fr Zahnmedizin, Klinik fr Rekonstruktive Zahnmedizin (ICTRP)
Secondary trial IDs
not available
Results-Individual Participant Data (IPD)
No (ICTRP)
Further information on the trial
http://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00032124 (ICTRP)
Results of the trial
Results summary
not available
Link to the results in the primary register
not available