The purpose of this study is to compare two different timings of restoring dental implants that are placed right after tooth extraction: The test group will have the provisional crown placed at the time of implant placement. The control group will have the tooth removed and the implant placed at the same appointment but restorations placed after 4 months. Both procedures currently are accepted methods for replacing missing teeth but direct comparisons of the two procedures are lacking. The results of this study should aid clinicians in selecting the best timing for restoring implants for their patients. The hypothesis is that immediate restoration might increase aesthetic outcomes, e.g. less mucosal recession.
A single center, randomized controlled, parallel-arm study is planned to investigate esthetic outcomes after immediate placement and restoration in the esthetic zone. Forty adult patients who have a hopeless maxillary anterior or premolar tooth, with intact adjacent teeth will be enrolled. A signed written informed consent will be obtained after he or she has been given verbal and written information describing the nature and duration of the study. Subjects will not be screened or treated until an informed consent has been obtained. Patient information will be protected according to the privacy regulations of the Federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). The enrolled patients will be randomly placed into one of two treatment groups, immediate implant placement (IIP) and restoration group (IR) or the IIP + delayed restoration group (DR). For all patients, the hopeless tooth will be extracted atraumatically and an implant placed immediately. The decision will be made randomly to either restoring the implant immediately (Test group) with a provisional crown or restoring the implant at 4 months after implant placement (Control group). Outcome analyses will be performed until approximately 1-year after the implant surgery and primarily evaluate clinical and radiographic parameters to determine the esthetic outcomes of immediately restored IIP implants, in comparison to those immediately placed but restored in a delayed approach.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
40
Test (immediate restoration)
Control: delayed restoration
University of Michigan School of Dentistry
Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
Mucosal Recession Change
Mucosal level change from baseline to one year was primarily determined by an imaginary line connecting the gingival margin of the adjacent teeth. This was measured in millimeters.
Time frame: Baseline, 1 year
Radiographic Marginal Bone Level Change
Mean of mesial and distal marginal bone level changes measured by standard radiographs using customized device. This was measured in millimeters.
Time frame: Baseline, 1 year
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.