Clinical trial NCT04092920: Implant Stability of Laser vs SLA Surface Treated Implants Placed in Fresh Extraction Sockets
Official title: Primary Implant Stability of Laser Surface Treated Versus Sand Blasted/Acid Etched Surface Treated Implants in Fresh Extraction Sockets: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: UNKNOWN
Phase: NA
Conditions: Implant Site Reaction
Lead sponsor: Cairo University
Sponsor class: OTHER
First posted: 2019-09-17
Enrollment: 15
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 21
Maximum age (years): 65
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Allocation: NA
Intervention model: SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose: TREATMENT

Brief summary: Commercially available implant surfaces are moderately roughened surfaces and they are obtained by acid-etching following alumina or titanium oxide grit-blasting.

Although the micro-rough implants can be successful in compromised clinical scenarios, the bioinert nature of titanium surfaces cannot stimulate a more rapid bone regeneration and mechanical fixation of dental implants.

Laser surface treatment is used to produce an implant surface modification on the nano-scale with controlled and reproducible patterns in addition to exhibiting a sterilizing effect and achieving efficient oxidation .

Detailed description: For dental implant to be successful, a direct contact between the bone tissue and the surface of the implant should be developed \& this physiological phenomenon is known by the term of osseointegration.

Initially, it was supposed that to achieve osseointegration, implants had to be submerged under the mucosa \& left without any loading for a period of 3-4 months in mandible and 6-8 months in maxilla.

Recently immediate implant placement at the time of extraction has become a viable treatment alternative, this approach provides the advantages of decreasing the patient's discomfort, the treatment's duration and costs.

Aiming to reduce healing process to limit such changes in the soft \& hard tissues and reducing treatment time, several alterations in both surgical and restorative procedures has been introduced. From an implant design perspective, two approaches including the fields of biomaterials and/or biomechanics have been most utilized; implant body design which aim to increase the primary stability and surface modifications to allow faster osseointegration process.

Rough implant surface is modified by different techniques. Among these different techniques, interest in of using laser to achieve roughened surfaces.

Commercially available implant surfaces are moderately roughened surfaces and they are obtained by acid-etching following alumina or titanium oxide grit-blasting.

Although the micro-rough implants can be successful in compromised clinical scenarios, the bioinert nature of titanium surfaces cannot stimulate a more rapid bone regeneration and mechanical fixation of dental implants.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* Adult patients with badly broken teeth indicated for extraction. • Presence of adequate bone beyond the root apex to guarantee implant primary stability \& implant placement within the alveoli confines.

Exclusion Criteria:

* • Presence of acute infections in the implant site.

  * Presence of fenestrations or dehiscence of the residual bony walls after extraction.
  * Heavy smokers more than 20 cigarettes per day.
  * Patients with systemic disease that may affect normal healing.
  * Psychiatric problems.
  * Disorders to implant are related to history of radiation therapy to the head and neck neoplasia.
  * Immunodeficiency pathology, bruxism, stress situation (socially or professionally), emotional instability, and unrealistic aesthetic demands.

Primary outcomes:
measure: rate of change in implant stability at baseline,2,4,8,12 weeks
timeFrame: 3 months
Secondary outcomes:
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Cairo
country: Egypt
facility: Cairo University
Study officials:
References: