[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"implants\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:implants":26},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,3,0,[8,42,71],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":16,"sex":17,"minAge":18,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":19,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":4,"briefSummary":23,"conditions":24,"keywords":27,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":31,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":32,"startDateStruct":35,"completionDateStruct":37,"leadSponsor":39,"locationsCount":4},"100620870","cbct-based-safety-distance-for-implant-placement-near-the-inferior-alveolar-canal-100620870",false,"NCT07363239","CBCT-Based Safety Distance for Implant Placement Near the Inferior Alveolar Canal","A New Concept of Safety Distance to Place Implants in the Area of the Inferior Alveolar Canal to Avoid Neurosensory Disturbance: A Retrospective CBCT Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Age ≥ 21 years.\n2. Implants placed in mandibular first\u002Fsecond premolar or molar positions (Froum et al., 2021).\n3. Patients without neurosensory changes following implant placement and healing (Froum et al., 2021).\n4. Patients with neurosensory changes after implant placement, including paresthesia, anesthesia, dysesthesia (and neuralgia where applicable) (Froum et al., 2021).\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Incomplete records preventing outcome ascertainment (Froum et al., 2021).\n2. Refusal\u002Funavailability of postoperative CBCT when clinically required for evaluation (Froum et al., 2021).\n3. Poor-quality CBCT scans or scatter artifacts interfering with evaluation (Froum et al., 2021).\n4. Contraindications for radiographs (e.g., pregnancy\u002Fbreastfeeding) in cases where additional imaging would otherwise be clinically required (Froum et al., 2021).\n5. Implants placed after mental foramen",true,"ALL","21 Years",{"count":20,"type":21},100,"ESTIMATED","OBSERVATIONAL","o evaluate the radiologic proximity of mandibular dental implants placed less than 2 mm from the inferior alveolar canal using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), and to determine the relationship between implant-canal distance and the occurrence of postoperative neurosensory disturbances.",[25,26],"Inferior Alveolar Approximation","Implants",[28,29],"inferior alveolar nerve","implants","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-03-17",{"date":33,"type":34},"2026-03-19","ACTUAL",{"date":36,"type":21},"2027-01-20",{"date":38,"type":21},"2027-01-30",{"name":40,"class":41},"Cairo University","OTHER",{"id":43,"slug":44,"hasResults":11,"nctId":45,"briefTitle":46,"officialTitle":47,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":48,"healthyVolunteers":16,"sex":17,"minAge":49,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":50,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":52,"phases":53,"briefSummary":55,"conditions":56,"keywords":57,"overallStatus":30,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":62,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":63,"startDateStruct":65,"completionDateStruct":67,"leadSponsor":69,"locationsCount":4},"100532036","implants-placed-with-crestal-sinus-approach-versus-osseodensification-in-atrophic-posterior-maxilla-100532036","NCT06207578","Implants Placed With Crestal Sinus Approach Versus Osseodensification in Atrophic Posterior Maxilla","Long Term Stability of Implants Placed With Crestal Sinus Approach Versus Osseodensification in Atrophic Posterior Maxilla. A Randomized Clinical Trial.","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Edentulous atrophic posterior maxillary ridge.\n2. Residual alveolar ridge height within 5-6 mm.\n3. At least 2mm band of keratinized tissue.\n4. Patients with good oral hygiene.\n5. Compliant patients to the follow up periods.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Medically compromised patients.\n2. Smokers.\n3. Pregnant females.\n4. Patients with active periodontal disease.\n5. Bruxer patients.\n6. Patients with chronic or active sinusitis.","20 Years",{"count":51,"type":21},28,"INTERVENTIONAL",[54],"NA","However, recently, most described techniques for posterior atrophic maxillary rehabilitation, are targeting more conservative, cost-effective and efficient methods for sinus elevation eliminating its lateral access. The aim of the present study is to evaluate and compare the long-term implant stability for implants placed by the novel crestal sinus approach versus osseodensification using Densa-bur in Atrophic Posterior Maxilla.",[26],[58,59,60,61],"osseodensification","densah bur","Crestal implant approach","closed sinus elevation","2025-04-15",{"date":64,"type":34},"2025-04-18",{"date":66,"type":21},"2025-08-01",{"date":68,"type":21},"2025-11-01",{"name":70,"class":41},"Misr International University",{"id":72,"slug":73,"hasResults":11,"nctId":74,"briefTitle":75,"officialTitle":75,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":76,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":4,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":77,"targetDuration":79,"studyType":22,"phases":4,"briefSummary":80,"conditions":81,"keywords":85,"overallStatus":95,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":96,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":97,"startDateStruct":99,"completionDateStruct":101,"leadSponsor":103,"locationsCount":105},"100419452","outcome-of-dental-implant-therapy-in-patients-treated-with-antiresorptive-medication-100419452","NCT04741906","Outcome of Dental Implant Therapy in Patients Treated With Antiresorptive Medication","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patient with cancer or osteoporosis, treated with antiresorptive treatment.\n* The patients should have sufficient compliance, this includes willingness to have the planned assessments\n* The patient should have an expected life span at enrollment of at least 2 years.\n* The local bone quality and quantity should be sufficient for implant insertion without bone augmentation and is classified according to the classification by Cawood \\& Howell 1988.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* \\> 10 cigarettes daily\n* HbA1c \\> 53 mmol\u002Fmol\n* Poor oral hygiene\n* Poor general condition: ECOG score 3 or 4.\n* Poor prognosis: Expected survival \\\u003C2 year is an exclusion cause.\n* Presence of metastases of the liver brain.\n* Poor local jaw bone quality acc. to Cawood classification stage 3 or 4.\n* Unwillingness to comply with the planned assessments and recordings",{"count":78,"type":21},225,"2 Years","Aim of the study is to examine the feasibility of dental implant insertion in patients receiving high, adjuvant and low dose \\> 4 years.",[82,26,83,84],"Missing Teeth","Cancer","Osteoporosis",[86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94],"Dental implants","High dose antiresorptive medication","Rehabilitation","Denosumab","Bisphosphonate","Oral rehabilitation","Adjuvant dose antiresorptive medication","Low dose antiresorptive medication","Bone modifying agents","RECRUITING","2024-08-20",{"date":98,"type":34},"2024-08-21",{"date":100,"type":34},"2017-08-01",{"date":102,"type":21},"2025-12-31",{"name":104,"class":41},"Copenhagen University Hospital at Herlev",1]