[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"dental-implant\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:dental-implant":29},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":7,"results":8},null,53,0,25,[9,43,82,106,134,170,192,219,240,268,301,329,356,381,401,426,449,473,503,526,553,577,596,618,641],{"id":10,"slug":11,"hasResults":12,"nctId":13,"briefTitle":14,"officialTitle":15,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":16,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":20,"enrollmentInfo":21,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":25,"briefSummary":27,"conditions":28,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":31,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":32,"startDateStruct":35,"completionDateStruct":37,"leadSponsor":39,"locationsCount":42},"100632328","to-compare-the-two-implant-placement-protocols-to-evaluate-placement-accuracy-and-post-operative-healing-of-the-implant-100632328",false,"NCT07512258","To Compare the Two Implant Placement Protocols to Evaluate Placement Accuracy and Post-operative Healing of the Implant","Assessment of Two Implant Placement Protocols to Evaluate Placement Accuracy and Post-Operative Healing","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* English speaking\n* At least 18 years old\n* Must be a patient of the UAB Dental School\n* Able to read and understand informed consent document\n* Patients presenting with a single edentulous site planned for dental implant placement\n* Presence of periodontally healthy, non-carious neighboring teeth and\u002For healthy restored dental implants on either side of edentulous site planned for dental implant placement.\n* No anticipated need for surgical and\u002For endodontic care at teeth adjacent to the proposed surgical site during the study period.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Non-English speaking\n* Less than 18 years old\n* Smokers\u002Ftobacco users (\\>10 cigarettes\u002Fday)\n* Patients with systemic pathologies or conditions contraindicating oral surgical procedures or adversely affecting wound healing\n* Absence of adjacent teeth\u002Fimplants on either side of the tooth to be extracted and\u002For edentulous sites where 2 or more adjacent implants are planned.",true,"ALL","18 Years","85 Years",{"count":22,"type":23},40,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[26],"NA","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).",[29],"Dental Implant","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-06-22",{"date":33,"type":34},"2026-06-25","ACTUAL",{"date":36,"type":23},"2026-08",{"date":38,"type":23},"2028-07",{"name":40,"class":41},"University of Alabama at Birmingham","OTHER",1,{"id":44,"slug":45,"hasResults":12,"nctId":46,"briefTitle":47,"officialTitle":48,"acronym":49,"eligibilityCriteria":50,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":51,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":53,"briefSummary":54,"conditions":55,"keywords":62,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":72,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":73,"startDateStruct":75,"completionDateStruct":77,"leadSponsor":79,"locationsCount":81},"100641124","do-immediate-digital-workflows-increase-patient-value-100641124","NCT07656597","Do Immediate Digital Workflows Increase Patient Value?","Do Immediate Digital Workflows Increase Patient Value? A Patient-Reported Outcome Measure-Based Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Immediate Versus Delayed Digital Posterior Implant Workflows","ITI PROM RCT","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adults aged 18 years or older.\n* Indication for single implant therapy in a posterior premolar or molar extraction site.\n* Good oral hygiene with FMPS ≤20%.\n* Controlled periodontitis according to protocol definition.\n* At least one natural tooth adjacent to the implant site and presence of an antagonist tooth.\n* Ability to comply with study procedures and provide written informed consent.\n* Adequate bone volume for immediate or delayed placement.\n* Extraction site suitable for centrally positioned, prosthetically driven implant placement using straight prosthetic components.\n* Ability to achieve 3-4 mm circumferential implant engagement in native bone along the planned implant axis while maintaining safety distance from vital structures.\n* For molar sites, septal bone classified as Smith \\& Tarnow Type A or Type B, including cases requiring closed sinus floor elevation.\n* Post-extraction socket presenting as a contained or partially contained defect with at least three relatively intact socket walls and no individual socket wall vertical defect \\>5 mm.\n* No facial soft-tissue dehiscence or mucogingival defect associated with buccal bone dehiscence.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* • Known or suspected poor compliance, alcohol abuse, or substance abuse.\n\n  * Systemic or local contraindications to implant surgery.\n  * History of head\u002Fneck radiotherapy or recent malignancy within 5 years.\n  * Use of medications affecting bone metabolism.\n  * Bisphosphonate use within the past 5 years.\n  * Uncontrolled periodontal disease.\n  * Heavy smoking (\\>10 cigarettes\u002Fday).\n  * Pregnancy or lactation.\n  * Teeth with periapical lesions \\>5 mm in greatest diameter, or sockets demonstrating a large cortical perforation \\>5 mm in greatest dimension on CBCT.",{"count":52,"type":23},50,[26],"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.",[29,56,57,58,59,60,61],"Implant Therapy","Immediate Dental Implant Placement","Delayed Implant","Guided Surgery Accuracy","Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO)","Single Tooth Dental Implant",[29,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71],"immediate implant placement","delayed implant placement","digital workflow","guided surgery","patient-reported outcomes","OHIP-14","posterior implant rehabilitation","chairside time","volumetric analysis","2026-06-15",{"date":74,"type":34},"2026-06-18",{"date":76,"type":23},"2026-08-03",{"date":78,"type":23},"2028-10-31",{"name":80,"class":41},"Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf",2,{"id":83,"slug":84,"hasResults":12,"nctId":85,"briefTitle":86,"officialTitle":87,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":88,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":89,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":91,"briefSummary":92,"conditions":93,"keywords":95,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":97,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":98,"startDateStruct":100,"completionDateStruct":102,"leadSponsor":104,"locationsCount":42},"100638724","influence-of-alveolar-bone-drilling-and-anatomical-position-on-integration-100638724","NCT07589140","Influence of Alveolar Bone Drilling and Anatomical Position on Integration","Influence of Alveolar Bone Drilling and Anatomical Position on the Primary Stability, Osseointegration and Functioning of Immediately Placed Dental Implants","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* ≥ 18 years old.\n* healthy patients without medical contraindications for dental implantation surgery.\n* removable and non-molar teeth indicated for extraction in both jaws\n* healthy soft tissues (bleeding on probing \\\u003C 20%, plaque index \\\u003C 25%);\n* intact alveolar bone walls post-extraction\n* signed informed consent form and permission to use the obtained data for research purposes.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Smokers (≥ 10 cigarettes per day);\n* history of uncontrolled periodontitis;\n* uncontrolled diabetes\u002Falcoholism;\n* use of drugs that may affect healing;\n* persons who, due to health status, cannot be considered capable of reasonably assessing their interests;",{"count":90,"type":23},124,[26],"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:\n\n* Does absence of alveolar drilling before implant placement give the same result as traditional osteotomy with apical drilling?\n* Is palatinal root position of implant as succesful as central position?\n\nResearchers 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:\n\n1. Dental implants will be placed in the extraction socket with an apical osteotomy.\n2. Dental implants will be placed in the extraction socket without performing an osteotomy.\n3. Dental implants will be placed in the centre of the extracted maxillary molar socket.\n4. Dental implants will be placed into the palatal root socket of the extracted maxillary molar.",[29,94,57],"Bone Grafting",[96],"dental implant","2026-06-01",{"date":99,"type":34},"2026-06-03",{"date":101,"type":23},"2026-07",{"date":103,"type":23},"2028-05",{"name":105,"class":41},"Lithuanian University of Health Sciences",{"id":107,"slug":108,"hasResults":12,"nctId":109,"briefTitle":110,"officialTitle":111,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":112,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":113,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":115,"briefSummary":116,"conditions":117,"keywords":120,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":126,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":127,"startDateStruct":129,"completionDateStruct":130,"leadSponsor":132,"locationsCount":4},"100627156","comparative-evaluation-of-xenograft-alone-and-sticky-bone-in-sinus-lift-with-concurrent-implant-placement-100627156","NCT07444970","Comparative Evaluation of Xenograft Alone and Sticky Bone in Sinus Lift With Concurrent Implant Placement","Comparative Evaluation of Xenograft Alone and Sticky Bone in Sinus Lift With Concurrent Implant Placement: A Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adults aged 18 years and older.\n* Patients presenting with residual bone height of less than 5 millimeters in the posterior maxilla requiring sinus floor elevation for dental implant placement.\n* Good oral hygiene status with absence of active periodontal disease.\n* Medically fit patients with no systemic conditions contraindicating oral surgical procedures.\n* Non-smokers.\n* Absence of acute or chronic maxillary sinusitis.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Presence of uncontrolled systemic diseases (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes mellitus or severe cardiovascular diseases).\n* Immunocompromised patients.\n* History of radiation therapy to the head and neck region.\n* History of sinus surgery or sinus pathology that may interfere with sinus floor elevation procedures.\n* Presence of active infection or inflammation at the intended surgical site.\n* Use of medications known to affect bone metabolism or healing, such as bisphosphonates or long-term corticosteroid therapy.",{"count":114,"type":23},18,[26],"Introduction \\& Background:\n\nModern 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.\n\nAutogenous 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).\n\nPlatelet-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.\n\nObjectives:\n\nThe study aims to assess the clinical efficacy of sticky bone as a bone graft material in sinus lift procedures compared with conventional xenograft materials.\n\nMethods:\n\nA 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.\n\nStudy Design:\n\nPatients 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).\n\nStatistical Analysis:\n\nSample 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).",[118,29,119],"Sinus Lifting","Sticky Bone",[121,122,123,124,125],"Dental implants","sticky bone","bone graft","sinus lift","PRF","2026-05-21",{"date":128,"type":34},"2026-05-26",{"date":97,"type":23},{"date":131,"type":23},"2027-04-01",{"name":133,"class":41},"Fayoum University",{"id":135,"slug":136,"hasResults":12,"nctId":137,"briefTitle":138,"officialTitle":138,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":139,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":140,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":142,"briefSummary":143,"conditions":144,"keywords":152,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":162,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":163,"startDateStruct":165,"completionDateStruct":167,"leadSponsor":168,"locationsCount":42},"100637934","assessment-of-soft-tissue-thickness-over-zygomatic-implants-in-atrophied-maxilla-covered-with-buccal-fat-pad-vs-palatal-pedicle-flap-100637934","NCT07574606","Assessment of Soft Tissue Thickness Over Zygomatic Implants in Atrophied Maxilla Covered With Buccal Fat Pad vs. Palatal Pedicle Flap","Inclusion Criteria:\n\nPatients ≥18 years with severely atrophic maxilla.\n\n* Acquired maxillary defects resulting from trauma, pathology, or previous surgical resection.\n* Indicated for zygomatic implant-supported fixed prosthesis.\n* Sufficient mouth opening for zygomatic implants placement.\n* Patients willing to sign informed consent and attend follow-ups.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Uncontrolled systemic disease affecting healing (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes, etc).\n* Heavy smokers\n* Previous radiotherapy or bisphosphonate therapy.\n* Active sinus or nasal infection.\n* Severe parafunctional habits (e.g., bruxism).\n* Pregnant or lactating women.\n* Patients with psychiatric disorders affecting compliance.",{"count":141,"type":23},4,[26],"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.\n\nTo 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.\n\nStudy 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.\n\nFollowing 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).\n\nSurgical Intervention Overview All surgical procedures will be performed under appropriate anesthesia following standard sterile protocols.\n\nFor 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.\n\nFor 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.\n\nBoth 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.\n\nClinical 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.",[145,146,29,147,148,149,150,151],"Atrophic Edentulous Maxilla","Zygomatic Implants","Soft Tissue Augmentation at Dental Implants","Soft Tissue Coverage","Buccal Fat Pad","Palatal Pedicle Flap","Zygomatic Implant Recession",[153,154,155,156,157,158,159,160],"atophic edentulous maxilla","zygomatic implants","dental implants","soft tissue augmentation at dental implant site","soft tissue coverage","buccal fat pad","palatal pedicle flap","zygomatic implant recession","RECRUITING","2026-05-18",{"date":164,"type":34},"2026-05-20",{"date":166,"type":34},"2025-11-03",{"date":36,"type":23},{"name":169,"class":41},"Future University in Egypt",{"id":171,"slug":172,"hasResults":12,"nctId":173,"briefTitle":174,"officialTitle":175,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":176,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":177,"enrollmentInfo":178,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":180,"briefSummary":181,"conditions":182,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":183,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":184,"startDateStruct":186,"completionDateStruct":188,"leadSponsor":190,"locationsCount":4},"100637511","apically-positioned-flap-vs-rolled-flap-for-soft-tissue-management-during-implant-second-stage-surgery-100637511","NCT07595211","Apically Positioned Flap vs Rolled Flap for Soft Tissue Management During Implant Second-Stage Surgery","Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Management During Second-Stage Surgery With Two Different Flap Techniques: A Randomized Controlled Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patients between the ages of 18-80.\n2. Non-smokers or former smokers with at least a 5-year successful cessation history.\n3. Patients with normal systemic health (ASA-I) or well-controlled\u002Fstable systemic conditions (ASA-II), such as diabetes with HbA1c \\\u003C 7.0%, no recent acute myocardial infarction or cerebrovascular accidents within 6 months, or any contraindication for periodontal or implant surgery.\n4. Patients who had, or plan to have, 2 non-adjacent implants of the same system placed under a two-stage implant protocol.\n5. The diameter discrepancy of the 2 target implants must be less than 1 mm.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Current smokers, or smokers who have quit \\\u003C5 years prior to study entry.\n2. Pregnant or lactating women\n3. Patients with substance or alcohol abuse\n4. Patients with a history of antiresorptive therapy, head and neck radiotherapy, and chemotherapy for malignant tumors\n5. Other systemic conditions or medication affecting wound healing.\n6. Poor plaque control with plaque score \\> 20%\n7. Active\u002Funtreated odontogenic and periodontal infections\n8. Implants placed, or planned to be placed, with one-stage implant protocol.\n9. The diameter discrepancy of the 2 target implants is equal to or greater than 1 mm (≥ 1 mm).\n10. Implants showing signs of early peri-implant bone loss or infection.\n11. Severe loss of keratinized tissue (\\> 50%) at the implant site\n12. Non-English speaking individuals for studies involving informed consent.","80 Years",{"count":179,"type":23},16,[26],"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.\n\nIf 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.\n\nPatients 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.\n\nPatients 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.",[29],"2026-05-12",{"date":185,"type":34},"2026-05-19",{"date":187,"type":23},"2026-06-30",{"date":189,"type":23},"2028-06-30",{"name":191,"class":41},"Ohio State University",{"id":193,"slug":194,"hasResults":12,"nctId":195,"briefTitle":196,"officialTitle":197,"acronym":66,"eligibilityCriteria":198,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":199,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":200,"briefSummary":201,"conditions":202,"keywords":205,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":212,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":213,"startDateStruct":215,"completionDateStruct":216,"leadSponsor":218,"locationsCount":42},"100635310","evaluation-of-zygomatic-implant-placement-accuracy-using-fully-metallic-vs-resin-based-static-surgical-guides-in-severely-atrophic-maxilla-100635310","NCT07551024","Evaluation of Zygomatic Implant Placement Accuracy Using Fully Metallic vs Resin-based Static Surgical Guides in Severely Atrophic Maxilla","Evaluation of Zygomatic Implant Placement Accuracy Using Fully Metallic vs Resin-based Surgical Guides in Severely Atrophic Maxilla.","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients ≥18 years with severely atrophic maxilla.\n* Acquired maxillary defects resulting from trauma, pathology, or previous surgical resection.\n* Indicated for zygomatic implant-supported fixed prosthesis.\n* Sufficient mouth opening for zygomatic implants placement.\n* Patients willing to sign informed consent and attend follow-ups.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Uncontrolled systemic disease affecting healing (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes, etc).\n* Heavy smokers\n* Previous radiotherapy or bisphosphonate therapy.\n* Active sinus or nasal infection.\n* Severe parafunctional habits (e.g., bruxism).\n* Pregnant or lactating women.\n* Patients with psychiatric disorders affecting compliance.",{"count":141,"type":23},[26],"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.\n\nPlacing 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.\n\nSurgical 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.\n\nThe 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.\n\nPatients 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.\n\nAfter 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.\n\nThe results of this study will help determine whether metallic surgical guides or resin surgical guides provide better accuracy when placing zygomatic implants.\n\nParticipation in this study is voluntary. All patients will receive full information about the study and will sign a consent form before participating.",[145,146,203,29,204],"Guided Surgery","Accuracy of Dental Implant Placement",[206,207,208,209,210,211],"Zygomatic implants","Severely atrophic maxilla","Surgical guides","Dental implant placement accuracy","Metal surgical guide","Resin surgical guide","2026-05-04",{"date":214,"type":34},"2026-05-07",{"date":166,"type":34},{"date":217,"type":23},"2026-06",{"name":169,"class":41},{"id":220,"slug":221,"hasResults":12,"nctId":222,"briefTitle":223,"officialTitle":224,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":225,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":226,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":228,"briefSummary":229,"conditions":230,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":231,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":232,"startDateStruct":234,"completionDateStruct":236,"leadSponsor":238,"locationsCount":42},"100522765","investigating-implant-surface-effect-on-osseointegration-nga-vs-modsla-100522765","NCT06086873","Investigating Implant Surface Effect on Osseointegration: NGA vs. ModSLA","A Randomised Clinical Trial Investigating Effect of Implant Surface Characteristic on Crestal Marginal Bone Loss, Inflammatory Response and Aesthetic Outcomes: Novel Gradient Anodized and Sandblasted Large-grit Acid-etched Implant Surfaces","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age: over 18 years old,\n* Gender: male and female.\n* Patient must be able and willing to follow study procedures and instructions and have capacity to provide informed consent.\n* Patient must require tooth extraction of a maxillary first premolar or single-rooted anterior tooth as the result of caries, endodontic failure or trauma\n* The extraction site must have adjacent teeth present.\n* Adjacent teeth with no evidence of interdental bone loss\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Systemic disease that can interfere with dental implant therapy (e.g. uncontrolled diabetes)\n* 2 adjacent teeth requiring extraction\n* Greater than one wall of the socket missing - assessed at time of extraction\n* Any contraindications for oral surgical procedures\n* Any known systemic disease affecting bone metabolism (e.g. Cushing's syndrome, Crohn's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, diabetes type I and uncontrolled diabetes type II), systemic infections or recent surgical procedures within 30 days of study initiation;\n* Chronic treatment (i.e., 2 weeks or more) with any medication known to affect oral status (e.g., phenytoin, dihydropyridine, calcium antagonists and cyclosporine) or bone metabolism (e.g. bisphosphonates, hormone replacement therapy, immunosuppressants) within 1 month before baseline visit;\n* HIV or viral hepatitis;\n* Physical handicaps that would interfere with the ability to perform adequate oral hygiene;\n* History of local irradiation therapy in the head-neck region\n* Mucosal diseases (e.g. erosive lichen planus)\n* Current untreated periodontitis or gingivitis. In particular probing depths of \\>4mm on one of the teeth immediately adjacent to the extraction site\n* Untreated acute endodontic lesions\n* Current smokers (have smoked within 3 months of study onset)\n* Any known systemic disease affecting bone metabolism (e.g. Cushing's syndrome, Crohn's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, diabetes type I and uncontrolled diabetes type II), systemic infections or recent surgical procedures within 30 days of study initiation;\n* Self-reported alcoholism or chronic drug abuse;\n* Patients suffering from a known psychological disorder or with limited mental capacity or language skills such that study information could not be understood,\n* Non-compliant patients, vulnerable individuals or those unable to understand written or verbal communication and give consent.\n* Pregnant or breastfeeding patients\n* Involvement in current research or recent involvement in any research prior to recruitment\n* Full-mouth bleeding (BOP) and plaque (PI) scores \\>30% or sites with periodontal pocket depth \\>5 mm at the completion of the pre-treatment phase.",{"count":227,"type":23},39,[26],"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.",[29],"2026-04-20",{"date":233,"type":34},"2026-04-22",{"date":235,"type":34},"2023-09-05",{"date":237,"type":23},"2027-03-31",{"name":239,"class":41},"Barts & The London NHS Trust",{"id":241,"slug":242,"hasResults":12,"nctId":243,"briefTitle":244,"officialTitle":245,"acronym":246,"eligibilityCriteria":247,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":248,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":250,"briefSummary":251,"conditions":252,"keywords":255,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":259,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":260,"startDateStruct":262,"completionDateStruct":264,"leadSponsor":266,"locationsCount":42},"100633040","evaluation-of-guided-tissue-regeneration-with-autogenous-bone-chips-and-cgf-during-implant-placement-100633040","NCT07521514","Evaluation of Guided Tissue Regeneration With Autogenous Bone Chips and CGF During Implant Placement","Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Guided Tissue Regeneration Using Autogenous Bone Chips and Concentrated Growth Factors Membranes With Simultaneous Implant Placement. (Case Series)","CGF","inclusion criteria:\n\n* A medical history that contraindicates oral surgical treatment such as (uncontrolled\u002Funtreated diabetes mellitus, immuno-compromised status, radio or chemotherapy of the oral and maxillofacial region, treatment with oral and\u002For intravenous bisphosphonates).\n* Presence of active or untreated periodontal disease.\n* Vertical root fractures involving the buccal aspect.\n* Tooth \u002Fteeth with horizontal fractures below bone level.\n* Tooth \u002Fteeth with external or internal resorption.\n* Patients with destructive oral habits such as smoking, chewing tobacco, bruxism,etcetera(Chrcanovic et al., 2014).\n\nexclusion criteria: A medical history that contraindicates oral surgical treatment such as (uncontrolled\u002Funtreated diabetes mellitus, immuno-compromised status, radio or chemotherapy of the oral and maxillofacial region, treatment with oral and\u002For intravenous bisphosphonates).\n\n* Presence of active or untreated periodontal disease.\n* Vertical root fractures involving the buccal aspect.\n* Tooth \u002Fteeth with horizontal fractures below bone level.\n* Tooth \u002Fteeth with external or internal resorption.\n* Patients with destructive oral habits such as smoking, chewing tobacco, bruxism, etcetera(Chrcanovic et al., 2014).",{"count":249,"type":23},8,[26],"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",[253,254,29],"Alveolar Bone Loss","Alveolar Ridge Augmentation",[246,256,257,96,258],"autogenous bone graft","gingival biotype","guided tissue regeneration","2026-04-08",{"date":261,"type":34},"2026-04-13",{"date":263,"type":23},"2026-04-16",{"date":265,"type":23},"2026-10",{"name":267,"class":41},"Cairo University",{"id":269,"slug":270,"hasResults":12,"nctId":271,"briefTitle":272,"officialTitle":273,"acronym":274,"eligibilityCriteria":275,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":276,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":278,"briefSummary":279,"conditions":280,"keywords":283,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":292,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":293,"startDateStruct":294,"completionDateStruct":296,"leadSponsor":298,"locationsCount":141},"100632817","clinical-safety-and-effectiveness-of-the-straumann-dynamic-navigation-system-falcon-100632817","NCT07518615","Clinical Safety and Effectiveness of the Straumann Dynamic Navigation System Falcon","Clinical Safety and Effectiveness of Straumann Dynamic Navigation System (Falcon): a Prospective Multicenter and Multinational Clinical Investigation","Falcon","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients of either sex, ≥ 18 years old.\n* Partially edentulous patients requiring at least one dental implant.\n* Suitable clinical situation as judged by the investigator (e.g., satisfactory soft and hard tissue conditions and occlusion).\n* Ability to understand and sign the informed consent form.\n* Willingness and ability to participate in the planned study program.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Fully edentulous patients.\n* Patients without at least 3 adjacent teeth for accurate positioning of the digital tray, and another tooth for accuracy check (minimum 30 mm distance from marker position).\n* Contraindications for dental implant treatment as per the implant Instructions for Use.\n* Contraindications listed in the Instructions for Use of the Straumann Falcon system.\n* Pregnant women or women planning pregnancy during study participation.",{"count":277,"type":23},75,[26],"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.\n\nThe 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.\n\nThe 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.",[281,282,29],"Partially Edentulous Jaw","Tooth Loss",[29,284,285,286,287,288,289,290,291],"Dynamic Navigation","Computer-Assisted Surgery","Falcon System","Straumann","CBCT (Cone Beam Computed Tomography)","Partially Edentulous Patients","Accuracy of Implant Placement","Post-Market Clinical Investigation","2026-04-02",{"date":259,"type":34},{"date":295,"type":34},"2026-01-22",{"date":297,"type":23},"2027-04",{"name":299,"class":300},"Institut Straumann AG","INDUSTRY",{"id":302,"slug":303,"hasResults":12,"nctId":304,"briefTitle":305,"officialTitle":306,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":307,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":308,"enrollmentInfo":309,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":311,"briefSummary":312,"conditions":313,"keywords":315,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":320,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":321,"startDateStruct":323,"completionDateStruct":325,"leadSponsor":327,"locationsCount":42},"100631199","effect-of-local-application-of-1-metformin-gel-on-implant-stability-and-peri-implant-bone-density-a-randomized-controlled-study-100631199","NCT07497568","Effect of Local Application of 1% Metformin Gel on Implant Stability and Peri-implant Bone Density: A Randomized Controlled Study","Effect of Local Application of 1% Metformin Gel on Implant Stability and Peri-implant Bone Density: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* 1\\) Patients age at least 18 years old. 2) Patient with partial edentulous teeth bounded areas that need dental implant for teeth replacement.\n\n  3\\) Adequate bone volume for implant placement (at least 5 mm width - 10 mm height).\n\n  4\\) Ability to tolerate conventional surgical and restorative procedures. 5) Patients who are willing to comply the study and give their consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n\\- 1) Active infection or inflammation in the implant zone. 2) Presence of any uncontrolled systemic diseases. 3) Patient with history of chemotherapy or radiotherapy. 4) Patient had undergone bone grafting and soft tissue procedures prior to implant surgery.\n\n5\\) Patient had undergone tooth extraction at the implant site less than 6 months prior to implant surgery.","70 Years",{"count":310,"type":23},34,[26],"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",[29,314],"Stability",[96,316,317,318,319],"CBCT","Metformin","bone density","RFA","2026-03-23",{"date":322,"type":34},"2026-03-27",{"date":324,"type":34},"2025-11-01",{"date":326,"type":23},"2027-06-01",{"name":328,"class":41},"University of Baghdad",{"id":330,"slug":331,"hasResults":12,"nctId":332,"briefTitle":333,"officialTitle":334,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":335,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":336,"enrollmentInfo":337,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":339,"briefSummary":340,"conditions":341,"keywords":342,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":348,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":349,"startDateStruct":351,"completionDateStruct":353,"leadSponsor":355,"locationsCount":42},"100618585","hard-tissue-augmentation-with-or-without-connective-tissue-graft-in-immediate-esthetic-implants-100618585","NCT07333534","Hard Tissue Augmentation With or Without Connective Tissue Graft in Immediate Esthetic Implants","Effectiveness of Hard Tissue Augmentation With or Without Connective Tissue Graft Following Immediate Dental Implants in the Esthetic Zone: A Randomized Controlled Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with a non-restorable tooth or a remaining root without signs of acute infection in the maxillary esthetic zone.\n* The failing tooth is an incisor, canine or first bicuspid in the maxilla bounded by natural sound teeth.\n* Sufficient bone (\\>4 mm) apically and palatally to allow for proper implant positioning with sufficient primary stability (≥35 N cm).\n* Sufficient mesial-distal and interocclusal space for placement of the implant and definitive restoration.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with systemic conditions affecting bone healing (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes).\n* Teeth with current acute periapical infection.\n* Dehiscence of the labial (facial) bone plate after extraction.\n* Signs of uncontrolled periodontal disease.\n* Heavy smokers and vulnerable groups (pregnant females and decision-impaired individuals).\n* History of head and neck radiation therapy.","65 Years",{"count":338,"type":23},28,[26],"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.\n\nSubjects will randomly assigned to one of two groups:\n\n* Group A (control group) receiving an immediate single-tooth implant in the esthetic zone with bone augmentation only.\n* Group B (study group) receiving an immediate single-tooth implant in the esthetic zone with bone augmentation and connective tissue graft (CTG).\n\nThe main questions it aims to answer is:\n\nIs 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?",[29],[343,344,345,346,347],"immediate implant","maxillary esthetic zone","CTG","jumping gap","bone augmentation","2026-03-12",{"date":350,"type":34},"2026-03-13",{"date":352,"type":34},"2025-12-20",{"date":354,"type":23},"2026-07-01",{"name":328,"class":41},{"id":357,"slug":358,"hasResults":12,"nctId":359,"briefTitle":360,"officialTitle":361,"acronym":362,"eligibilityCriteria":363,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":364,"enrollmentInfo":365,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":367,"briefSummary":368,"conditions":369,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":372,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":373,"startDateStruct":375,"completionDateStruct":377,"leadSponsor":379,"locationsCount":42},"100628238","artificial-intelligence-guided-versus-manual-cbct-planning-for-immediate-implant-placement-100628238","NCT07459036","Artificial Intelligence-Guided Versus Manual CBCT Planning for Immediate Implant Placement","Artificial Intelligence-Guided Versus Manual CBCT Planning for Immediate Implant Placement in Molar Extraction Sites: A Randomized Controlled Trial","AI","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adults≥18 years are able to provide informed consent. Indicated for the extraction of a molar tooth (maxillary or mandibular) with planned implant-supported rehabilitation.\n* Candidate for immediate implant placement attempt based on preoperative clinical evaluation and CBCT availability.\n* Preoperative CBCT will be acquired using the study imaging protocol within a defined window (e.g., ≤4 weeks before surgery).\n* Adequate oral hygiene and periodontal condition compatible with implant surgery (e.g., treated\u002Fstable periodontal status per clinician judgement).\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Pregnancy or breastfeeding (due to imaging\u002Fsurgical considerations).\n* Uncontrolled systemic disease or medical contraindication to oral surgery\u002Fimplant placement (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes, immunosuppression as judged by clinician).\n* History of head and neck radiotherapy in the implant region. Use of medications associated with compromised bone healing where immediate implant placement is not advised (e.g., high-dose antiresorptives\u002FIV bisphosphonates; you can specify per your clinic policy).\n* Acute uncontrolled infection at the site requiring staged management (e.g., spreading cellulitis\u002Fabscess) or other condition precluding immediate placement per surgeon judgement.\n* Need for simultaneous major augmentation that precludes immediate implant placement (e.g., extensive ridge reconstruction planned at the same surgery rather than socket-level grafting).\n* Inadequate CBCT quality for segmentation\u002Fmeasurement (motion artifacts, incomplete field of view, or metal artifact obscuring the septum).","99 Years",{"count":366,"type":23},80,[26],"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.\n\nWhen 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.\n\nIn 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.\n\nThe 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.\n\nThe 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.",[29,370,371],"Immediate Implant","Guided Bone Regeneration","2026-03-06",{"date":374,"type":34},"2026-03-09",{"date":376,"type":23},"2026-03-03",{"date":378,"type":23},"2026-05-02",{"name":380,"class":41},"Shalash Dental education",{"id":382,"slug":383,"hasResults":12,"nctId":384,"briefTitle":385,"officialTitle":386,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":387,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":20,"enrollmentInfo":388,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":390,"phases":4,"briefSummary":391,"conditions":392,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":393,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":394,"startDateStruct":396,"completionDateStruct":398,"leadSponsor":400,"locationsCount":4},"100583119","chart-review-comparing-the-position-and-tilt-of-dental-implants-versus-those-of-natural-teeth-100583119","NCT06872177","Chart Review: Comparing the Position and Tilt of Dental Implants Versus Those of Natural Teeth","Axial Inclination of Mandibular Molar Dental Implants Versus Natural Teeth: What Are the Differences?","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with mandibular molar implant placement.\n* Presence of contralateral natural mandibular first, second molars or both.\n* Availability of pre-extraction CBCT scans of the corresponding or contralateral mandibular molar tooth or panoramic radiographs for mesiodistal angulation.\n* Availability of post-implant CBCT scans or panoramic radiographs for mesiodistal angulation\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Incomplete or low-quality CBCT scans.\n* History of mandibular trauma or pathologies altering tooth or implant alignment.\n* History of reconstructive mandibular surgery in the implant region.\n* History of periapical pathology",{"count":389,"type":23},400,"OBSERVATIONAL","Background:\n\nWhen placing a dental implant, it is not always possible to place it exactly in the same position as the tooth that it replaced. That might be because of how the gums and mouth are shaped, since some bone is always lost after a tooth is extracted. Researchers want to study the records of people who have had dental implants. They want to check to see how much difference there is between how the implant is positioned and how the same tooth on the other side is positioned. They also want to compare how the implant is positioned compared to the tooth it replaced, when that is possible in the dental record.\n\nStudy design:\n\nThis study will not enroll any participants. The researchers will search the database of patient records at the study clinic to find people who have had dental implants of a single molar tooth. Then they will look at them to find records that include good images that they can use to compare the implant and tooth positions.\n\nResearchers will then analyze the findings and write a review article.",[29],"2026-01-21",{"date":395,"type":34},"2026-01-23",{"date":397,"type":23},"2026-02",{"date":399,"type":23},"2027-05",{"name":191,"class":41},{"id":402,"slug":403,"hasResults":12,"nctId":404,"briefTitle":405,"officialTitle":406,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":407,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":408,"maxAge":308,"enrollmentInfo":409,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":410,"briefSummary":411,"conditions":412,"keywords":414,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":417,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":418,"startDateStruct":420,"completionDateStruct":422,"leadSponsor":424,"locationsCount":81},"100612632","occlusion-and-dis-occlusion-time-in-mandibular-overdentures-supported-by-conventional-versus-mini--dental-implants-100612632","NCT07256106","Occlusion and Dis-Occlusion Time in Mandibular Overdentures Supported by Conventional Versus Mini- Dental Implants","Evaluation of The Occlusion and Dis-Occlusion Time in Mandibular Single Overdentures Supported by Conventional Versus Mini- Dental Implants; A Parallel Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* patients with completely edentulous mandibular ridges and fully dentate or partially dentate maxillary arch restored with fixed restoration,\n\n  * enough inter-arch space to allow for prosthetic rehabilitation with lower implant-retained overdentures\n  * good oral hygiene and motivation.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* The excluded patients will be patients with major systemic diseases that may affect osseointegration as uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, pregnancy, patients under bisphosphonate treatment.","55 Years",{"count":338,"type":23},[26],"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.\n\nResearch 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.",[29,413],"Edentulous Mouth",[415,416],"occlusion time","disocclusion time","2025-12-28",{"date":419,"type":34},"2025-12-30",{"date":421,"type":34},"2025-11-29",{"date":423,"type":23},"2026-04-15",{"name":425,"class":41},"Ain Shams University",{"id":427,"slug":428,"hasResults":12,"nctId":429,"briefTitle":430,"officialTitle":431,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":432,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":364,"enrollmentInfo":433,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":435,"briefSummary":436,"conditions":437,"keywords":439,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":441,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":442,"startDateStruct":444,"completionDateStruct":446,"leadSponsor":448,"locationsCount":42},"100435779","ridge-augmentation-using-allograft-particles-hydrated-with-or-without-recombinant-human-platelet-derived-growth-factor-100435779","NCT04954664","Ridge Augmentation Using Allograft Particles Hydrated With or Without Recombinant Human Platelet-Derived Growth Factor","Lateral Ridge Augmentation Using Allograft Bone Particles Hydrated With or Without Recombinant Human Platelet-Derived Growth Factor: A Clinical and Histological Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* English speaking\n* At least 18 years old\n* Must be a patient of the UAB Dental School\n* Able to read and understand informed consent document\n* Need for implants to replace missing tooth or teeth in at least one quadrant of the mouth.\n* Insufficient alveolar ridge width for endosseous implant placement defined as 5mm or less as determined by bone sounding and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Non-English speaking\n* Less than 18 years old\n* Smokers\u002Ftobacco users (\\>10 cigarettes\u002Fday)\n* Patients with systemic pathologies or conditions contraindicating oral surgical procedures or adversely affecting wound healing\n* Patient is a poor compliance risk (i.e., poor oral hygiene, history of alcohol or drug abuse)\n* Vertical loss of bone at edentulous ridge.",{"count":434,"type":23},44,[26],"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).",[29,438],"Bone Loss",[440,121],"New bone","2025-12-19",{"date":443,"type":34},"2025-12-29",{"date":445,"type":34},"2021-08-11",{"date":447,"type":23},"2027-12",{"name":40,"class":41},{"id":450,"slug":451,"hasResults":12,"nctId":452,"briefTitle":453,"officialTitle":454,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":455,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":456,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":457,"briefSummary":459,"conditions":460,"keywords":461,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":464,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":465,"startDateStruct":467,"completionDateStruct":469,"leadSponsor":471,"locationsCount":42},"100614489","phase-4-clinical-performance-of-nobel-n1-system-100614489","NCT07280260","Clinical Performance of Nobel N1 System","Effects of Early Loading Protocol on the Survival of the Nobel N1 Implant System: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Males and females, age 18 or older\n\n  * Can provide an Informed Consent in English.\n  * Absence of a single posterior tooth in mandible or maxilla with presence of natural neighboring teeth (except for second molar which only requires presence of first molar)\n  * Presence of antagonist teeth\n  * Possibility and will for an immediate restoration.\n  * Systemic health recorded as an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I or II\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* · Unavailability to attend the follow-up visits.\n\n  * A systemic contraindication for oral surgical procedures; ASA III or IV.\n  * Pregnancy or nursing on screening or before the surgical procedure.\n  * Diseases that could alter healing or bone metabolism (uncontrolled diabetes, diagnostic osteoporosis, etc.),\n  * Taking medications that are altering healing or bone metabolism (bisphosphonates, long-time corticosteroids intake, RANK inhibitors, etc.)\n  * Alcohol or drug abuse.\n  * Current heavy smoking behavior (≥10 cigarettes\u002Fday).\n  * Radiation therapy to the head or neck region.\n  * Pathology in the implant planned sites that prevent implant placement.\n  * Current diagnosis of Diabetes, which is uncontrolled (\\>7 HbA1C).\n  * Need for sinus lift or vertical bone augmentation\n  * Previously failed implant site",{"count":52,"type":23},[458],"PHASE4","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.",[282,29],[462,463,121],"Tooth loss","Edentulous","2025-12-11",{"date":466,"type":34},"2025-12-12",{"date":468,"type":23},"2025-12-15",{"date":470,"type":23},"2028-01-30",{"name":472,"class":41},"Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center in New Orleans",{"id":474,"slug":475,"hasResults":12,"nctId":476,"briefTitle":477,"officialTitle":478,"acronym":479,"eligibilityCriteria":480,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":481,"maxAge":482,"enrollmentInfo":483,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":485,"briefSummary":486,"conditions":487,"keywords":490,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":495,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":496,"startDateStruct":498,"completionDateStruct":500,"leadSponsor":502,"locationsCount":42},"100615340","phase-4-comparing-dynamic-navigation-to-static-navigation-in-the-implant-placement-100615340","NCT07291336","Comparing Dynamic Navigation to Static Navigation in the Implant Placement","Accuracy Assessment of Dynamic Vs. Static Navigation Implant Placement Protocols (Randomized Controlled Trial)","RCT","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Healthy patients at least 22 years old.\n\n  * At least one missing tooth to be restored using an implant in the upper jaw from the maxillary right 2nd premolar to the maxillary left 2nd premolar.\n  * At least six residual teeth in the affected jaw (5).\n  * Minimum of 5 mm available bone.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Medical condition or medication that would impair bone healing.\n\n  * Poor oral hygiene\n  * Inadequate bone width or height that may need bone augmentation. 5\n  * Alcohol users.\n  * Smoking more than 10 cigarettes per day.\n  * History of head and neck radiotherapy.\n  * Pregnant females.\n  * Uncontrolled hypertensive or diabetic patient.\n  * Vulnerable group; prisoners, pregnant women, orphans…etc","22 Years","60 Years",{"count":484,"type":23},20,[458],"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",[488,29,489],"Healthy Adults","Accuracy",[491,492,493,489,494],"dynamic navigation","static navigation","guide","delayed implant","2025-12-05",{"date":497,"type":34},"2025-12-18",{"date":499,"type":34},"2022-10-01",{"date":501,"type":23},"2026-01",{"name":425,"class":41},{"id":504,"slug":505,"hasResults":12,"nctId":506,"briefTitle":507,"officialTitle":507,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":508,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":509,"targetDuration":511,"studyType":390,"phases":4,"briefSummary":512,"conditions":513,"keywords":514,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":518,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":519,"startDateStruct":521,"completionDateStruct":523,"leadSponsor":524,"locationsCount":42},"100286008","assessing-current-clinical-concepts-in-dental-practice-100286008","NCT03003052","Assessing Current Clinical Concepts in Dental Practice","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. be a patient at The Campbell Clinic\n2. be planning to undergo or have undergone specialist dental treatment, usually involved dental implants\n3. be able to read and understand Patient Information Sheet\n4. Have signed informed consent form\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. concern that patient has not understood patient information sheet (e.g. due to language \u002Finterpretation issues)\n2. not willing to sign consent form\n3. any medical condition\u002Fmedication that might compromise implant success",{"count":510,"type":23},300,"4 Years","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.",[29],[155,515,516,517],"edentulous","dental hygiene","evidence-based dentistry","2025-11-27",{"date":520,"type":34},"2025-12-04",{"date":522,"type":4},"2017-01",{"date":101,"type":23},{"name":525,"class":300},"The Campbell Clinic, UK",{"id":527,"slug":528,"hasResults":12,"nctId":529,"briefTitle":530,"officialTitle":531,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":532,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":533,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":534,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":536,"briefSummary":537,"conditions":538,"keywords":542,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":544,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":545,"startDateStruct":547,"completionDateStruct":549,"leadSponsor":551,"locationsCount":42},"100537323","influence-of-timing-of-implant-placement-on-early-healing-molecular-events-100537323","NCT06276335","Influence of Timing of Implant Placement on Early Healing Molecular Events","Influence of Timing of Implant Placement on Early Healing Molecular Events: A Two-centre, Parallel Group, Pilot Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age ≥25 years old\n* Good\u002Fcontrolled medical and psychological health\n* Good oral hygiene (FMPS≤20%)\n* Presence of a tooth in the aesthetic region (from incisor to second premolar) in need of extraction and further oral rehabilitation with a single dental implant.\n* For the IP group, the extraction socket should fulfil the following parameters, as described by the 5th ITI consensus \\[46\\]: intact socket wall; facial bone wall ≥1mm in thickness; no acute infection at the site; availability of bone apical and palatal to the socket to provide primary stability.\n* At least one neighbouring natural tooth.\n* A functional occlusion with a minimum of four occlusal units (i.e., pairs of occluding posterior teeth).\n* Willingness to read and sign a copy of the Informed Consent Form (ICF) after reading the Patient Information Sheet (PIS), and after the nature of the study has been fully explained and potential questions fully answered.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Any known systemic disease severely affecting bone metabolism (e.g., Cushing's syndrome, Crohn's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis or diabetes type I and uncontrolled diabetes type II).\n* Self-reported HIV or viral hepatitis.\n* Self-reported alcoholism or chronic drug abuse.\n* Smokers (including current smokers or former smokers who had quit for \\\u003C 3 months); patients reporting use of vape\u002Fe-cigarettes will also be excluded.\n* Self-reported pregnancy or lactation (this criterion is due to oral tissue changes related to pregnancy and nursing, which can affect interpretation of study results).\n* Chronic treatment (i.e., 2 weeks or more) with any medication known to affect oral status or bone metabolism (e.g., bisphosphonates, hormone replacement therapy, immunosuppressants) within 1 month before baseline visit.\n* Chronic treatment with anticoagulants (including Aspirin), corticosteroids, immunosuppressants or other medications that may influence blood coagulation\u002Fcount.\n* Antibiotic or anti-inflammatory therapy during the month preceding the baseline exam.\n* Untreated caries lesions and untreated\u002Funcontrolled periodontal disease; If patients require periodontal treatment (non-surgical and\u002For surgical), this will be arranged outside the study protocol and completed prior to enrolment;\n* Inadequate keratinized tissue width (\\\u003C2 mm) in the mid-buccal aspect of the area to be treated in the study.\n* Physical handicaps that would interfere with the ability to perform adequate oral hygiene in the area of implant placement.\n* Patients requiring maxillary sinus lift surgery before implant placement.\n* Self-reported bruxism.\n* Patients not willing to receive animal-derived biomaterials for GBR.\n* Patients suffering from a known psychological disorder or with limited mental capacity or language skills such that study information could not be understood, informed consent could not be obtained, or simple instructions could not be followed.\n* Other severe acute or chronic medical or psychiatric condition or laboratory abnormality that may increase the risk associated with trial participation or may interfere with the interpretation of trial results and, in the judgement of the investigator, would make the subject inappropriate for entry into this trial.","25 Years",{"count":535,"type":23},24,[26],"Dental implants have been on the market for several years and they are routinely used to replace single\u002Fmultiple 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).\n\nThe 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).",[29,539,540,541],"Healing Wound","Biomarkers","Saliva",[543],"Implant placement protocol","2025-11-17",{"date":546,"type":34},"2025-11-19",{"date":548,"type":34},"2024-09-26",{"date":550,"type":23},"2026-12-31",{"name":552,"class":41},"Queen Mary University of London",{"id":554,"slug":555,"hasResults":12,"nctId":556,"briefTitle":557,"officialTitle":558,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":559,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":20,"enrollmentInfo":560,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":561,"briefSummary":562,"conditions":563,"keywords":565,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":568,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":569,"startDateStruct":571,"completionDateStruct":573,"leadSponsor":575,"locationsCount":42},"100555101","closed-sinus-augmentation-with-a-calcium-phosphosilicate-putty-100555101","NCT06507709","Closed Sinus Augmentation With a Calcium Phosphosilicate Putty","Radiographic Changes in the Maxillary Sinus Following Closed Sinus Augmentation With Calcium Phosphosilicate","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Ability of participant to understand and the willingness to sign a written informed consent document.\n2. English speaking.\n3. Individuals who are normal healthy or have a diabetes diagnosis with a current HbA1c (glycated glucose)\\\u003C 7.0.\n4. Partially edentulous patients (18-85 years of age) requiring maxillary sinus augmentation for dental implant placement\n5. At minimum 5mm of native bone below the maxillary sinus inferior border\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Maxillary sinus disease\n2. Diabetes diagnosis with a current HbA1c \\> 7.1 or greater due to diabetes effect on bone metabolism\n3. Pregnant or attempting to become pregnant\n4. Having a disease that affects bone metabolism\n5. Use of medications known to affect bone metabolism\n6. Tobacco, cannabis or vaping use\n7. Alcoholism or other recreational drugs",{"count":7,"type":23},[26],"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.\n\nThe 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.\n\nThe 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.",[29,564],"Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation",[566,567],"Cone beam computed tomography","Calcium Phosphosilicate putty","2025-11-10",{"date":570,"type":34},"2025-11-12",{"date":572,"type":34},"2024-10-08",{"date":574,"type":23},"2027-06",{"name":576,"class":41},"The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio",{"id":578,"slug":579,"hasResults":12,"nctId":580,"briefTitle":581,"officialTitle":582,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":583,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":584,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":390,"phases":4,"briefSummary":585,"conditions":586,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":161,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":587,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":588,"startDateStruct":590,"completionDateStruct":592,"leadSponsor":594,"locationsCount":42},"100490227","mucograft-seal-in-arp-follow-up-100490227","NCT05663385","Mucograft Seal in ARP Follow-up","Alveolar Ridge Preservation With a Xenograft (Bio-Oss® Collagen) and a Collagen Matrix (Mucograft® Seal) or a Free Connective Tissue Graft Versus Spontaneous Healing:A 5-year Follow up","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* All patients previously included in the above mentioned RCT.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients treated with radiotherapy during follow-up in the head-and-neck region or current chemotherapy; disability (mental and\u002For physical) to maintain basic oral hygiene procedures.",{"count":277,"type":23},"Rationale: Early implant placement with alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) using either a collagen matrix or a palatal graft rendered similar esthetic, clinical and PROMs to early implant placement without ARP, up to 1 year after functional loading.\n\nObjective: The aim of this study is to evaluate esthetic and clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction following single-tooth replacement in the anterior maxilla in patients treated with a xenograft and a collagen matrix or a free connective tissue graft versus spontaneous healing 5 years after loading\n\nStudy design: prospective observational study with 5-year follow-up\n\nIntervention (if applicable): not applicable\n\nMain study parameters\u002Fendpoints: Comparison of the level of the buccal marginal gingiva (midfacial mucosa level) between ARP versus spontaneous healing\n\nSecondary parameters\u002Fendpoint: Peri-implant esthetic score (PES) and white esthetic score (WES), complications, implant survival; and success, Plaque Index, Modified bleeding index, Gingival Index, Probing Depth, PROMs, bone and soft tissue volumetric dimensional changes.",[29],"2025-08-07",{"date":589,"type":34},"2025-08-12",{"date":591,"type":34},"2024-04-16",{"date":593,"type":23},"2025-10-01",{"name":595,"class":41},"Erasmus Medical Center",{"id":597,"slug":598,"hasResults":12,"nctId":599,"briefTitle":600,"officialTitle":600,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":601,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":602,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":390,"phases":4,"briefSummary":604,"conditions":605,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":610,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":611,"startDateStruct":612,"completionDateStruct":614,"leadSponsor":616,"locationsCount":4},"100602103","multicentric-prospective-observational-study-of-neodent-implantable-devices-of-helix-short-system-100602103","NCT07119151","Multicentric Prospective Observational Study of Neodent Implantable Devices of Helix Short System","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with atrophic maxilla and mandible, who need of one or more dental implants with opposing dentition (natural teeth or teeth\u002Fimplant-supported fixed restorations) and who qualify for placement of Helix Short implants.\n* Collaborative patient.\n* Patient with opposing dentition (natural teeth or fixed and\u002For removable restorations)\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Contraindication according to the IFU: This product is contraindicated for patients who show signs of allergy or hypersensitivity to the chemical components of titanium. Implants with a length of 4 mm are contraindicated for single and overdenture rehabilitations, and they are contraindicated for total and multiple restorations when not associated with implants with lengths greater than or equal to 5.5 mm.\n* Patients with periodontal disease, severe alcohol\u002Ftobacco consumption, bruxism, high use of bisphosphonates or proton pump inhibitors (PPI), radiotherapy to the neck and head in the last 3 years, uncontrolled systemic diseases.\n* Pregnant patient.",{"count":603,"type":23},94,"This is a post-market prospective observational study to prospectively collect clinical data to confirm the long-term safety and clinical performance of implants and abutments Helix Short in a daily dental practice setting, by means of success and survival rates of these devices. Additionally, from the collected data, the study aims to identify previously unknown side-effects and monitor the known side-effects and contraindications stated on the IFU, identify and analyze emerging risks on the basis of factual evidence, and ensure the continued acceptability of the benefit-risk ratio with the intent to verify that the intended purpose is correct for all JJGC products involved in the procedure that get in contact with the patient.",[606,29,607,608,609],"Edentulism","Atrophy of Edentulous Alveolar Ridge","Atrophy of Edentulous Mandibular Alveolar Ridge","Atrophy of Edentulous Maxillary Alveolar Ridge","2025-08-05",{"date":589,"type":34},{"date":613,"type":23},"2025-09-01",{"date":615,"type":23},"2028-12",{"name":617,"class":300},"Neodent",{"id":619,"slug":620,"hasResults":12,"nctId":621,"briefTitle":622,"officialTitle":623,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":624,"healthyVolunteers":12,"sex":18,"minAge":19,"maxAge":308,"enrollmentInfo":625,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":626,"briefSummary":627,"conditions":628,"keywords":629,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":633,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":634,"startDateStruct":636,"completionDateStruct":638,"leadSponsor":639,"locationsCount":42},"100598087","optimizing-alveolar-ridge-expansion-100598087","NCT07066930","Optimizing Alveolar Ridge Expansion","Optimizing Alveolar Ridge Expansion: A Clinical Comparison of Magneto-Dynamic Ridge Splitting and Versah Osseodensification Techniques","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adults aged 18 to 70 years.\n* Partially edentulous patients requiring ridge expansion prior to dental implant placement.\n* Alveolar ridge width between 4 mm and 6 mm as measured on CBCT.\n* Sufficient vertical bone height for implant placement without the need for vertical augmentation.\n* Adequate oral hygiene and commitment to postoperative care and follow-up visits.\n* Signed informed consent form.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Presence of systemic conditions contraindicating oral surgery (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes, immune-compromised status).\n* History of bisphosphonate therapy or radiation therapy to the head and neck region.\n* Active periodontal disease or untreated oral infections.\n* Heavy smokers (more than 10 cigarettes per day).\n* Pregnant or breastfeeding women.\n* History of substance abuse or psychiatric disorders that could impair compliance with study protocol.",{"count":22,"type":23},[26],"The goal of this clinical trial is to compare two surgical techniques-Magneto-Dynamic Ridge Splitting and Versah Osseodensification-for expanding narrow alveolar ridges in adults requiring dental implant placement. The main questions it aims to answer are:\n\nWhich technique better preserves alveolar bone width after surgery?\n\nWhich method results in higher primary implant stability?\n\nResearchers will compare ridge splitting using the Magnetic Mallet to ridge expansion using Versah drills to see if one technique leads to better clinical outcomes, such as improved bone preservation, greater implant stability, and favorable soft tissue response.\n\nParticipants will:\n\nUndergo ridge expansion surgery using either the Magnetic Mallet or Versah drills, followed by immediate dental implant placement.\n\nReceive CBCT scans before and 4 months after surgery to measure bone changes.\n\nUndergo implant stability testing using the ISQ (Implant Stability Quotient) method.\n\nHave intraoral scans to evaluate changes in soft tissue volume and thickness.",[29],[630,631,632,121],"Ridge expansion","Osseodensification","Magnetic mallet","2025-07-04",{"date":635,"type":34},"2025-07-15",{"date":637,"type":23},"2025-08-01",{"date":97,"type":23},{"name":640,"class":41},"Hawler Medical University",{"id":642,"slug":643,"hasResults":12,"nctId":644,"briefTitle":645,"officialTitle":646,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":647,"healthyVolunteers":17,"sex":18,"minAge":4,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":648,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":24,"phases":649,"briefSummary":650,"conditions":651,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":652,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":653,"startDateStruct":655,"completionDateStruct":657,"leadSponsor":659,"locationsCount":4},"100593599","inferior-alveolar-nerve-lateralization-with-simultaneous-implant-placement-in-atrophic-posterior-mandible-100593599","NCT07008534","Inferior Alveolar Nerve Lateralization With Simultaneous Implant Placement in Atrophic Posterior Mandible","Evaluation of Neurosensory Function of Inferior Alveolar Nerve Following Lateralization With Sticky Bone Versus Nil Using Computer Guided Dental Implant Placement: A Randomized Clinical Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Adult patients requiring oral rehabilitation with dental implants in vertically atrophied\n\n  * Posterior mandibular region, less than 8mm of bone above the mandibular canal.\n  * Patients should be free from any systemic conditions that may affect normal healing.\n  * Absence of any pathological conditions involving mandibular bones.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients under bisphosphonates treatment.\n\n  * Any contraindication for general anaesthesia.\n  * Osteoporotic patients.\n  * Patients with neurological disorders (neuralgias, Parkinson' s disease).\n  * Patients with systematic disease that may complicate healing.",{"count":114,"type":23},[26],"The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of sticky bone on acceleration of recovery of the neurosensory dysfunction of the inferior alveolar nerve following inferior alveolar nerve lateralization surgery for implant placement in patients with posterior vertical bone deficiency in order to overcome the main disadvantage of this technique \\& provide a reliable,saving time - computer guided simultaneous implant placement- and improved technique.",[29],"2025-07-03",{"date":654,"type":34},"2025-07-09",{"date":656,"type":23},"2025-07-01",{"date":658,"type":23},"2027-04-30",{"name":267,"class":41}]