Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05642520

Oval Abutment Versus a Circular Abutment in Dental Implants in the Anterior Maxillae

Objetive: The main objective of this clinical trial is to assess whether the oval section abutment of a 2.9mm implant achieves a greater covering of the tooth-implant papilla compared to a circular section abutment in 3.3mm implants in upper lateral incisors and lower central / lateral incisors.

Material and methods: fourty patients received unitary implants of 3.3mm or 2.9 mm diameter to replace the absence of upper lateral incisor or lower central/lateral incisor with an edentulous space of at least 6.4mm (mesio-distally). Esthetic and clinical parameters were evaluated 12 months after installation of the prosthesis.

Condition or disease: dental implants

Intervention/treatment: 3.3 or 2.9 mm diameter dental implants

Phase: Not Applicable

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Dental Implants

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Department of Stomatology II. UPV/EHU

Leioa, Biscay, 48940, Spain

About this study

The study was a double-blind controlled clinical trial (RCT) comparing the oval section abutment of a 2.9mm (test group) to a circular section abutment in 3.3mm (control group) implants for the replacement of a single tooth.

The choice of the diameter to be used as recommended by the manufacter, was determined by the mesiodistal width between the two adjacent natural teeth, in order to maintain at least 1.5mm between the implant and the adjacent tooth. When said the distance was between 5.9 and 6.3 mm, a 2.9 mm implant was placed, while if the width ranged between 6.4 and 7.1 mm, a 3.3 mm implant was placed. Both implant designs are made of a titanium and zirconium alloy (Roxolid®) with a SLActive® surface (Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland).

The main objective was the papillary index (PI) (Jemt, 1997). It consists in four scores: 0 = absence of interdental papilla; 1 = filling of the interdental space less than 50% of the soft tissues; 2 = filling of the interdental space greater than 50% of the soft tissues; 3 = total filling of the interdental space with good aesthetic harmony; 4 = Hyperplasic interdental papilla formation with irregular soft tissue. Both mesial and distal papilla will be recorded.

The secondary objectives are (a) to observe the stability of the soft and hard tissues after one year in function, (b) to assess the success and survival rate of the implants, (c) to assess the stability of the implants and their evolution and (d) to analyze the degree of patient satisfaction with the aesthetic result.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients >18 years of age
  • Absence of upper lateral incisors or lower central / lateral incisors with an edentulous space of at least 6.4mm (mesio-distally).
  • The teeth adjacent to the edentulous space must be natural.
  • Patients who are in periodontal health.
  • Signing of informed consent before entering the study.

Exclusion criteria

  • Patients with any systemic condition or disease that may interfere with oral surgery.
  • History of radiotherapy.
  • Patients smoking more than 20 cigarettes per day.
  • Pregnant or breastfeeding patients.

Treatment and study plan

Oval section abutment of 2.9 mm

Procedure

The choice of the diameter to be used as recommended by the manufacter, was determined by the mesiodistal width between the two adjacent natural teeth, in order to maintain at least 1.5mm between the implant and the adjacent tooth. When said the distance was between 5.9 and 6.3 mm, a 2.9 mm implant was placed. Implant designs are made of a titanium and zirconium alloy (Roxolid®) with a SLActive® surface (Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland).

Circular section abutment of 3.3 mm

Procedure

The choice of the diameter to be used as recommended by the manufacter, was determined by the mesiodistal width between the two adjacent natural teeth, in order to maintain at least 1.5mm between the implant and the adjacent tooth. When said the distance was between 6.4 and 7.1 mm, a 3.3 mm implant was placed. Implant designs are made of a titanium and zirconium alloy (Roxolid®) with a SLActive® surface (Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland).

Other names: Prosthetic treatment over a circular section abutment of 3.3.mm

Primary outcomes

  1. The main objective was the papillary index (PI) (Jemt, 1997)

    Time frame: 12 months

    It consists in four scores: 0 = absence of interdental papilla; 1 = filling of the interdental space less than 50% of the soft tissues; 2 = filling of the interdental space greater than 50% of the soft tissues; 3 = total filling of the interdental space with good aesthetic harmony; 4 = Hyperplasic interdental papilla formation with irregular soft tissue. Both mesial and distal papilla will be recorded.

Secondary outcomes

  1. To observe the stability of the soft and hard tissues after one year in function: probing depth

    Time frame: 12 months

    Probing depth (PD), defined as the distance (mm) between the most apical point of the gingival sulcus or periodontal pocket and the free gingival margin. It will be taken at six points per tooth and in four points by implant.

  2. To observe the stability of the soft and hard tissues after one year in function:bleeding on probing

    Time frame: 12 months

    Bleeding on probing (BP) (Ainamo and Bay 1975), presence of bleeding in six points per tooth (3 in vestibular and 3 in lingual or palatal).

  3. To observe the stability of the soft and hard tissues after one year in function: suppuration on probing

    Time frame: 12 months

    Suppuration on probing, presence of pus within 15 seconds after probing.

  4. To observe the stability of the soft and hard tissues after one year in function: Modified plaque index (MPI)

    Time frame: 12 months

    Modified plaque index (MPI) (Mombelli et al 1987): 0 = no plaque detected; 1 = detection of plaque when a periodontal probe passes over the surface of the implant; 2 = the plaque is visible to the naked eye; 3 = abundant plate.

  5. Assessment of survival rate of the implants

    Time frame: 12 months

    The survival rate of the implants will be recorded taking into consideration Albrektsson et al.´s criteria. (Albrektson et al 1986)

  6. Assessment of the success of the implants

    Time frame: 12 months

    The implant will be considered successful when: (a) non-detectable clinical mobility (manual test); (b) absence of radiolucency around the surface of the implant; (c) absence of persistent pain; (d) absence of recurrent peri-implant infection. (Buser et al. 1990)

  7. Analyze the degree of patient satisfaction with the aesthetic result.

    Time frame: 12 months

    Visual analog scale (VAS): the general patient satisfaction will be evaluated. The specific satisfaction with respect to 5 parameters will also be recorded - aesthetics, mastication, phonation, comfort and self-esteem - using 10 cm visual analog scales calibrated with the terms "nothing satisfied" and "totally satisfied" at the left and right ends respectively.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Ana María García de la Fuente

Other

Registry information

Official study title

A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing the Placement of an Oval Abutment in 2.9 mm Implants Versus a Circular Abutment in Implants of 3.3 mm to 12 Months of Evolution

Important dates

Study start
2018
Primary completion
2023
Study completion
2023
First posted
Dec 8, 2022
Registry last updated
Jul 27, 2023

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.