Immediate Implant With Different Filling Materials

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
36 patients, were included in this study. They were chosen from the Outpatient Clinic in the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University for replacement of non-restorable maxillary anterior and premolar teeth (esthetic zone) by immediate implant.

Official Title
-----------------
Comparison Between Different Filling Materials in Immediate Implant

Conditions
-----------------
Immediate Implant

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Other: bone filling materials


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patient medically free from systemic diseases. Age above 18 years. A single maxillary anterior or premolar tooth that cannot be restored. No acute infection is present. Patients with sufficient quality and quantity of bone. Free from history of bruxism. Exclusion Criteria: A medical condition that would prevent implant surgery. Existence of non-treated generalized progressive periodontitis. Patients who are smokers.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 45 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Triple


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: group 1<br>immediate implant placement and the buccal jumping gap was packed using PRF | Other: bone filling materials<br>* the buccal jumping gap was packed using PRF in group 1 the buccal jumping gap was packed using xenograft in group 2 the buccal jumping gap was packed using Alloplastic β-tricalcium phosphate in group 3<br>|
| Experimental: group 2<br>immediate implant placement and the buccal jumping gap was packed using xenograft | Other: bone filling materials<br>* the buccal jumping gap was packed using PRF in group 1 the buccal jumping gap was packed using xenograft in group 2 the buccal jumping gap was packed using Alloplastic β-tricalcium phosphate in group 3<br>|
| Experimental: group 3<br>immediate implant placement and the buccal jumping gap was packed using alloplast | Other: bone filling materials<br>* the buccal jumping gap was packed using PRF in group 1 the buccal jumping gap was packed using xenograft in group 2 the buccal jumping gap was packed using Alloplastic β-tricalcium phosphate in group 3<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| marginal bone loss | Cone Beam CT (CBCT) was used measure marginal bone loss | 1 year | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Implant Stability: | Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) was used to measure implant stability with an Osstell Mentor device. | 1 year | 
| Peri-implant Pocket depth | A graduated probe was used to measure the distance between the base of the pocket and the gingival margin | 1 year |