Dental Implant

The goal of this randomized clinical trial is to compare the primary stability of double-thread and triple-thread dental implant designs in patients requiring implant placement in the posterior maxilla. The main question it aims to answer is whether implant thread design influences primary implant stability in the posterior maxilla. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups. Group A will receive a double-thread dental implant, while Group B will receive a triple-thread dental implant. Primary implant stability will be assessed at the time of implant placement using insertion torque and resonance frequency analysis (ISQ).implant stability using ISQ will also be evaluated at 3 months

The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate whether an anatomical prefabricated healing abutment (AHA) improves tissue preservation and clinical outcomes following immediate implant placement after tooth extraction in adults. Although immediate implant placement is a well-established treatment for replacing missing teeth, healing can result in changes to the surrounding bone and soft tissues that may affect the esthetic appearance, function, and long-term stability of the implant-supported restoration. This study will compare an anatomical healing abutment, designed to mimic the natural tooth emergence profile and support peri-implant tissues during healing, with a conventional healing abutment. The primary objectives are to determine whether the AHA better preserves soft tissue contours and alveolar bone, improves implant positioning accuracy and tissue stability during healing, and differs from a conventional healing abutment in complications or adverse events. Eligible participants will be adults requiring extraction of a hopeless tooth in the posterior maxilla or mandible who are suitable candidates for immediate implant placement. Following tooth extraction and implant placement, participants will receive either an anatomical prefabricated healing abutment or a conventional healing abutment and will return for scheduled follow-up visits over approximately 12 months to assess healing, implant stability, and changes in the surrounding hard and soft tissues. Researchers will collect clinical measurements, digital intraoral scans, photographs, and radiographic images throughout the study. Additional research imaging will be used to generate three-dimensional models to measure tissue volume changes and implant position accuracy. Specialized software will compare changes between the two groups over time. Safety will be evaluated by monitoring participants for complications, discomfort, inflammation, implant-related problems, and other adverse events throughout follow-up. All procedures will be performed by trained dental professionals using established clinical protocols. The results may improve understanding of how healing abutment design influences tissue preservation after immediate implant placement and help optimize future implant therapy by supporting better functional, esthetic, and long-term outcomes.

Participant in this study are asked to participate because they have teeth or dental implants that were identified as having very little gum tissue and would benefit from gum tissue graft surgery. This study has 2 treatment groups that differ only in the material that will be used at the graft site: * Gum tissue taken from the patient's own palate * Commercially available collagen matrix derived from porcine (pig) Achilles tendon (FDA-approved for the surgery done in this study). Both materials have been in use in dental practices for many years, but no studies have directly compared the outcomes between palatal tissue and the porcine collagen matrix we will use in this study. Participants will be randomized into one of the 2 groups using sealed envelopes (the process is like flipping a coin). All the study visits will take place during regular dental appointments that would be scheduled even if not participating in this research.

This study will compare the effect of standard-dose and micro-dose recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) with a placebo control on dental implant stability in the posterior mandible. Sixty patients requiring a single dental implant will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: standard-dose rhBMP-2, micro-dose rhBMP-2, or sterile saline only. Implant stability will be measured using Resonance Frequency Analysis at baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and 12 weeks. Marginal bone loss, peri-implant bone density, ectopic bone formation, and postoperative sequelae including swelling, pain, trismus, and soft tissue healing will also be evaluated during follow-up. The aim is to determine whether micro-dose rhBMP-2 can improve implant stability while reducing postoperative complications compared with the standard dose.

The primary goal for any oral implantologist is to obtain satisfactory healing and long-term treatment success. Osseointegration is the key to dental implant success8 and is required to achieve direct structural and functional connection between living bone and the surface of a load-bearing artificial implant, is critical for the long-term success of dental implants. Successful dental implant therapy relies on achieving proper osseointegration, which ensures a stable structural and functional bond between the implant surface and surrounding bone. Although dental implants show a high overall success rate of around 95%.

The goal of this study is to evaluate two commonly utilized surgical guide protocols to determine dental implant placement accuracy compared to pre-operative computerized planning, post-operative healing and bone levels to 12-months post-placement, and patient assessed post-operative discomfort and healing using a visual acuity scale (VAS).

This two-center randomized controlled trial will evaluate whether an immediate digital posterior implant workflow provides greater patient-defined value than a delayed digital workflow in adults requiring single posterior implant rehabilitation. Participants will be randomized 1:1 to immediate implant placement at the time of tooth extraction or to delayed implant placement after approximately 16 weeks of healing following extraction and ridge preservation as indicated. The primary endpoint is oral health-related quality of life assessed longitudinally using the OHIP-14 questionnaire and analyzed as the model-based mean score averaged across the active treatment phase from baseline through definitive crown delivery. Secondary outcomes include workflow-related patient experience, chairside time, number of visits, postoperative pain, buccal contour changes based on intraoral scan-derived volumetric analysis, radiographic marginal bone level changes, implant survival, clinical peri-implant parameters, technical complications, esthetic outcomes, accuracy of guided implant placement, and clinician-reported workflow outcomes.

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if alveolar bone drilling and anatomical position of an immediately placed dental implant has influence on the primary stability, osseointegration and function. It aims to answer these questions: * Does absence of alveolar drilling before implant placement give the same result as traditional osteotomy with apical drilling? * Is palatinal root position of implant as succesful as central position? Researchers will compare crestal bone levels and primary stability of the implant after insertion in the groups. Subjects will be assigned to groups, acoording to clinical situation. Study groups: 1. Dental implants will be placed in the extraction socket with an apical osteotomy. 2. Dental implants will be placed in the extraction socket without performing an osteotomy. 3. Dental implants will be placed in the centre of the extracted maxillary molar socket. 4. Dental implants will be placed into the palatal root socket of the extracted maxillary molar.

Introduction \& Background: Modern dental implantology offers solutions for patients with edentulism in the maxillary arch, where sinus pneumatization and alveolar ridge atrophy are common conditions. This often requires sinus floor elevation and bone grafting prior to implant placement. Techniques such as the lateral window approach and osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation aim to achieve sufficient vertical bone height for successful implant placement. Autogenous bone grafts have long been considered the gold standard; however, their use is associated with limitations including donor site morbidity and graft volume loss, which has encouraged the exploration of alternative grafting materials. Sticky bone is a term used in oral surgery and implantology to describe a cohesive, moldable, and adhesive bone graft material prepared by combining particulate bone graft material (xenograft) with biological additives such as Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) or Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF). Platelet-Rich Fibrin (PRF), which is used in the present study, is an autologous leukocyte and platelet-rich fibrin matrix containing cytokines, platelets, and stem cells. PRF acts as a biodegradable scaffold that promotes microvascularization and guides epithelial cell migration. In addition, PRF may serve as a carrier for regenerative cells and allows sustained release of growth factors over a period ranging from one to four weeks, thereby enhancing the wound healing environment. Objectives: The study aims to assess the clinical efficacy of sticky bone as a bone graft material in sinus lift procedures compared with conventional xenograft materials. Methods: A randomized clinical trial will be conducted comparing two groups: one receiving sticky bone with simultaneous implant placement and another receiving xenograft with implant placement. Preoperative assessment will include Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) imaging, followed by postoperative monitoring to evaluate bone height and implant stability. Study Design: Patients fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be recruited from the dental clinic. Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants after explanation of study procedures, potential risks, and expected benefits. Eligible patients will be randomly allocated into two equal groups using a computer-generated randomization program: Group 1 (Sticky Bone group) and Group 2 (Xenograft group). Statistical Analysis: Sample size calculation was performed using G\*Power software version 3.1.9.7. The statistical test family selected was the t-test. Based on data from a previous study, a total of 16 participants were required to achieve a study power of 80% with a significance level (alpha) of 0.05. To compensate for potential dropouts, the total sample size was increased to 18 participants (9 patients per group).

Background and Rationale The rehabilitation of the severely atrophied maxilla utilizing zygomatic implants is a highly predictable and effective treatment modality. However, managing the peri-implant soft tissue in these complex cases remains a significant clinical challenge. Because zygomatic implants frequently emerge through thin, non-keratinized, and mobile alveolar mucosa rather than thick, attached gingiva, the peri-implant environment is highly susceptible to complications. Inadequate soft tissue thickness can lead to mucosal recession, exposure of the implant collar, plaque accumulation, and ultimately peri-implantitis, which threatens the long-term success of the prosthesis. To mitigate these risks and achieve an optimal permucosal seal, soft tissue augmentation is often required. Vascularized soft tissue grafts are preferred in these compromised anatomical sites due to their robust blood supply and enhanced healing capacity. The Buccal Fat Pad (BFP) flap is a well-documented and frequently utilized technique for this purpose; however, its volume can be unpredictable, and it may be unavailable due to prior surgeries or anatomical deficiencies. Therefore, evaluating robust alternatives, such as the Palatal Pedicle Flap (PPF)-which utilizes the thick, keratinized palatal mucosa-is critical for optimizing surgical outcomes. Study Design and Methodology This study is structured as a prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial utilizing a split-mouth design. The split-mouth approach is strategically chosen to eliminate inter-subject biological and immunological variability, allowing each patient to effectively serve as their own control. Patients presenting with a severely resorbed maxilla requiring bilateral zygomatic implant placement will be enrolled. Following successful implant placement, the right and left maxillary quadrants will be randomized. One side will be assigned to receive soft tissue augmentation using the standard Buccal Fat Pad (BFP) flap, while the contralateral side will be assigned to receive the Palatal Pedicle Flap (PPF). Surgical Intervention Overview All surgical procedures will be performed under appropriate anesthesia following standard sterile protocols. For the BFP side: The buccal fat pad will be accessed via a vestibular mucosal incision, carefully bluntly dissected, mobilized, and advanced over the zygomatic implant collar without tension. For the PPF side: A palatal pedicle flap will be meticulously outlined, elevated with its vascular supply intact, rotated, and adapted around the contralateral implant collar. Both flaps will be secured using appropriate resorbable sutures to ensure tension-free primary closure and optimal tissue adaptation around the implant abutment interface. Post-operative care will adhere to standard institutional guidelines, including the prescription of appropriate analgesics, antibiotics, and antimicrobial mouth rinses. Clinical Significance By systematically comparing the healing trajectories, tissue stability, and functional outcomes of the BFP and PPF techniques over a 6-month period, this trial aims to provide definitive, evidence-based guidance for soft tissue management in zygomatic implantology. Furthermore, it seeks to validate the PPF as a reliable and predictable reconstructive alternative in clinical scenarios where the buccal fat pad is deemed insufficient or inaccessible.

Patients are being asked to consider joining a research study that looks at two different ways dentists uncover dental implants during a small gum surgery. To join this study, Patients must have two dental implants that are ready to be uncovered. Both uncovering methods used in this research are normal, safe procedures that dentists already use every day. The purpose of this study is to learn which method helps the gums heal better, stay thicker, and look more natural over time. If patients decide to participate, the dentist will use one method on one implant and the other method on the second implant so we can compare how each implant heals. The study lasts about one year and includes the uncovering surgery plus scheduled follow-up visits. At these visits, the dentist will gently measure your gums, take pictures, take routine dental X-rays, and use a small camera scanner to check how the gum tissue changes. Patients will also be asked to rate any pain or swelling after surgery. Patients may have soreness, swelling, or minor bleeding-these are the same risks patients would have during normal implant care. Patients may or may not personally benefit, but the extra monitoring may help us track the healing closely, and patients' participation can help dentists improve care for future patients. Patients can receive regular implant treatment without joining the study. The goal of this summary is to help you think about the pros and cons and decide what feels right for patients.

Some patients lose a large amount of bone in the upper jaw. When this happens, it can be difficult to place regular dental implants. In these cases, special implants called zygomatic implants can be used. These implants are longer than normal implants and are fixed in the cheekbone, which usually has enough bone to support them. They can help support fixed teeth for patients with severe bone loss in the upper jaw. Placing zygomatic implants requires careful planning and high accuracy. To help guide the surgeon during the operation, a surgical guide can be used. A surgical guide is a custom-made device that helps the surgeon place the implant in the planned position. Surgical guides can be made from different materials. The most common type is made from resin (a strong plastic material) using 3D printing. Recently, fully metallic surgical guides have been developed. These metal guides may be stronger and more stable during surgery, but it is not yet clear if they improve the accuracy of implant placement. The purpose of this study is to compare the accuracy of metal surgical guides and resin surgical guides when placing zygomatic implants in patients with severe bone loss in the upper jaw. Patients included in the study will undergo a clinical examination and a CT scan before surgery to plan the implant positions. During the surgery, each patient will receive zygomatic implants on both sides of the upper jaw. On one side, the implants will be placed using a metal surgical guide, and on the other side, they will be placed using a resin surgical guide. This allows the two types of guides to be compared in the same patient. After the surgery, another CT scan will be taken to check the final position of the implants. The planned implant position will be compared with the actual position after surgery to measure the accuracy of placement. The results of this study will help determine whether metallic surgical guides or resin surgical guides provide better accuracy when placing zygomatic implants. Participation in this study is voluntary. All patients will receive full information about the study and will sign a consent form before participating.

This study aims to characterise the stability of crestal bone levels one year after loading, the associated aesthetic outcomes, immunological response, prosthodontic outcomes as well as overall patient reported outcome measures for modSLA (SLActive, Institut Straumann AG, Switzerland) and NGA (TiUltraNP, Nobel Biocare AG, Switzerland) dental implants.

CGF membranes will be prepared using a swing-lock centrifuge. A full-thickness mucoperiosteal flap will be elevated in a narrow alveolar ridge. Implants will be inserted. Autologous bone chips will be harvested via bone scraping and used for augmentation, CGF membranes will be placed over the grafted area. Suturing of the mucoperiosteal flap. Radiographic evaluation of the bone density and tissue thickness will be performed by CBCT preoperatively, immediate postoperative and after the procedure by 4 months. Clinical evaluation of the tissue thickness using periodontal probe preoperatively, immediate postoperatively and after the procedure by 4 months

The Falcon Study is a prospective, multicenter, multinational clinical investigation evaluating the Straumann® Dynamic Navigation System (Falcon) for dental implant placement. The Falcon system is a real-time dynamic navigation device that helps clinicians visualize the position of dental instruments during surgery. The purpose of the study is to assess whether Falcon enables safe and precise implant placement in partially edentulous patients compared to benchmarks from the literature for freehand implant placement. The study will enroll approximately 75 adult patients across four European centers (Switzerland, Italy, the Netherlands, and Belgium). Each patient will undergo preoperative planning, implant surgery with the Falcon system, and a postoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan to measure implant placement accuracy. The main outcomes are (1) angular deviation between planned and actual implant position, and (2) safety as measured by adverse device effects. Results will provide clinical evidence to support regulatory clearance and the safe adoption of the Falcon system in routine practice.

This randomized controlled clinical study aims to evaluate the effect of local application of 1% metformin gel on implant stability and peri-implant bone density. Patients requiring dental implants will be randomly allocated into two groups: a control group and a test group receiving metformin gel. Implant stability will be assessed using resonance frequency analysis, and bone density will be evaluated using CBCT imaging. The outcomes will be compared over a follow-up period to determine the effectiveness of metformin in enhancing osseointegration

This randomized controlled study is aimed to evaluate the esthetic, clinical, and radiographic outcomes following the placement of immediate single-tooth implant with hard and soft tissue augmentation. Subjects will randomly assigned to one of two groups: * Group A (control group) receiving an immediate single-tooth implant in the esthetic zone with bone augmentation only. * Group B (study group) receiving an immediate single-tooth implant in the esthetic zone with bone augmentation and connective tissue graft (CTG). The main questions it aims to answer is: Is there is a significant difference in the esthetic outcome between bone augmentation alone and bone augmentation combined with connective tissue graft after immediate dental implant in the esthetic zone?

This study evaluates whether artificial intelligence (AI)-based analysis of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans can support clinical decision-making for immediate dental implant placement in molar extraction sites. When a molar tooth is removed, placing a dental implant immediately may reduce treatment time and preserve surrounding bone. However, immediate implant placement is not always possible and depends on the anatomy of the extraction socket, particularly the interradicular septum (the bone between the roots). CBCT imaging is routinely used to assess this anatomy before surgery. Traditionally, radiologists manually evaluate these scans. Recently, AI-based tools have been developed to automatically analyze CBCT images. In this randomized controlled trial, patients requiring molar extraction and potential immediate implant placement will be assigned to one of two planning approaches: AI-guided CBCT assessment or conventional manual CBCT assessment. The operating surgeon will use the assigned planning report to guide treatment decisions. The primary outcome of the study is the feasibility of immediate implant placement, defined as successful implant placement with achievement of primary stability during surgery. Secondary outcomes include surgical time, need for changes to the treatment plan, and implant stability measurements. The goal of this study is to determine whether AI-assisted CBCT analysis performs similarly to, or improves upon, conventional manual radiologic assessment in supporting safe and effective immediate implant placement.

The aim of the study will be comparing between the occlusion and disocclusion time in mandibular single overdenture supported with immediately loaded two conventional implants versus immediately loaded four mini-implants. Research question Is there a difference in occlusion and disocclusion time between two mandibular single dentures, one supported by immediately loaded two conventional implants and the second one supported by immediately loaded four mini-implants? Primary outcome: occlusion and disocclusion time Secondary outcome: Kapur index The null hypothesis is that there is no difference between both treatment modalities on occlusion and disocclusion time.

This study will compare two techniques to achieve increase in ridge dimensions as a preparation for dental implants using a resorbable barrier membrane and bone particulate allogenic graft hydrated with saline or a growth factor called Recombinant Human Platelet-Derived Growth Factor (rhPDGF).

The purpose of the study is to evaluate whether N1 dental implants are successful when a final crown is placed on them at 6 weeks from implant placement surgery.

Implant placement is preplanned by taking xrays and impressions for the mouth one group a guide is fabricated and used to guide the implant drilling all through to the implant placement the other group, no guide is fabricated, but the implant is placed by dynamic navigation through looking in a screen and checking where the implant is fully placed

This purpose of this database is to collect, store and use appropriately derived data from routine patient care in a specialist dental practice. Comprehensive observational data will be gathered, systematically organised and be continuously updated. This data will be used to evaluate treatment outcomes and identify areas for improvement. This will contribute to the existing evidence base to validate new and current clinical concepts in dentistry. Patient consent will be sought for this, and all data extracted from patient notes will be stored and used anonymously. Use of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) -14 questionnaire pre and post treatment will be used to assess patient satisfaction with outcomes.

Dental implants have been on the market for several years and they are routinely used to replace single/multiple missing teeth with a high success rate. However, there is still a limited number of studies comparing the influence of timing of implant placement on wound healing. In addition, there is no data available on the signaling pathways and the expression of healing biomarkers involved in the early stages of osseointegration after immediate implant placement (IP) or delayed implant placement (DP). The primary objective of this study is to describe changes in the expression of inflammatory, angiogenesis and osseous biomarkers of saliva at 1, 3, 7, 15 and 30 days and of PICF at 3, 7, 15 and 30 days after immediate implant placement (IP) compared with delayed placement (DP).

The goal of this clinical study is to learn if cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) or 3-dimensional x-ray can help to let the investigator know if dental implant placement can be done after performing closed sinus surgery. The study will look at the structure of your gum where the implant will be placed after performing the surgery using 3-D x-ray and compare that to how the structure of your gum looks 6 months later. The 3-D imaging will happen after standard of care surgery to prepare your gum for an implant and then 6 months later to verify that the site is ready for the implant.