This prospective, single-center, interventional post-market clinical follow-up (PMCF) study aims to evaluate the early-term (24 months post-implantation) safety and efficacy of CE-marked BIODENTOSS® and DWC ® Dental Implants and Superstructures in patients requiring dental restoration for tooth loss.
The study evaluates safety by monitoring the incidence of complications and adverse events, while efficacy is assessed through implant survival/success rates, implant stability, marginal bone loss (MBL), chewing function, and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). Participants will be followed across 10 visits (baseline and 9 follow-up visits) including prosthetic restoration at 3-4 months and final evaluation at 24 months post-implantation.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
80
Surgical placement of CE-marked BIODENTOSS bone-level dental implants, available in conical or cylindrical models, with diameters ranging from 3.4 mm to 6.0 mm and lengths from 7.5 mm to 13 mm. Implants feature an SLA (Sandblasted, Large-grit, Acid-etched) surface texture and a 22-degree conical internal hex connection. Following an osseointegration period, prosthetic restoration will be completed using compatible superstructures, including cover screws, healing abutments, and various types of prosthetic abutments based on clinical indications.
Surgical placement of CE-marked DWC bone-level dental implants, available in cylindrical or active threaded models, with diameters ranging from 3.3 mm to 4.8 mm and lengths from 8 mm to 15 mm. Implants feature an SLA (Sandblasted, Large-grit, Acid-etched) surface texture and a 22-degree conical internal hex connection. Following an osseointegration period, prosthetic restoration will be completed using compatible superstructures, including cover screws, healing abutments, and various types of prosthetic abutments based on clinical indications.
Selcuk University, Faculty of Dentistry, Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.
Konya, Turkey (Türkiye)
RECRUITINGImplant Success and Satisfactory Survival Rate
The percentage of functional implants in each cohort meeting the 2007 International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference Health Scale criteria. Multiple clinical/radiographic parameters (pain, mobility, bone loss, exudate) are aggregated to classify each implant into a single category: Group I (Success: no pain/mobility, \<2mm bone loss, no exudate); Group II (Satisfactory Survival: no pain/mobility, 2-4mm bone loss, no exudate); Group III (Compromised Survival: potential sensitivity, no mobility, \>4mm bone loss \[\<50% of implant body\], pocket depth \>7mm, potential exudate); or Group IV (Failure: pain, mobility, bone loss \>1/2 implant length, or uncontrolled exudate). To arrive at the single reported value, data are aggregated by calculating the combined percentage of implants classified into Group I and Group II out of the total implants evaluated in each cohort.
Time frame: 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-implantation.
Implant Stability Measured by Resonance Frequency Analysis
Quantitative assessment of implant stability within each independent cohort using non-invasive Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA). Individual implant stability will be reported based on the Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) scale, ranging from 1 to 100. Higher values indicate greater stability, with an ISQ score ≥ 70 reflecting high stability.
Time frame: Immediate post-implantation (baseline) and pre-loading (at 3 months for mandibular implants or 4 months for maxillary implants)
Percentage of Implants With Zero Clinical Mobility
Assessment of post-loading implant stability evaluated via manual clinical examination. Clinical stability is measured by vertical and horizontal forces and graded using Mühlemann's Mobility Index, which ranges from 0 to 4 (where 0 indicates normal/physiological movement and 4 indicates vertical mobility). The single reported value will be the percentage of implants within each independent cohort achieving a mobility index score of "0" (lack of clinical mobility), indicating successful osseointegration.
Time frame: At 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-implantation (all post-loading follow-up visits).
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Incidence of Complications and Adverse Events
Safety data will be collected by recording all adverse events (AEs) and complications encountered during the 24-month follow-up period. This includes intraoperative complications (e.g., bone fenestration/dehiscence, nerve injury), device-related failures (e.g., implant fracture, loss of stability), and any postoperative adverse events (e.g., infection, peri-implant mucositis, or prosthetic component loosening).
Time frame: Throughout the 24-month follow-up period.
Marginal Bone Loss (MBL)
Radiographic assessment of bone level changes (mesial/distal) using digital panoramic/periapical radiographs.
Time frame: 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-implantation.
Chewing Function and Chewing Satisfaction
Assessed independently within each cohort. Chewing function will be verified via clinical occlusion control using articulation paper. Patient chewing satisfaction will be scored directly by the participant using a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1: not satisfied at all, to 5: very satisfied).
Time frame: Baseline and 6, 12, 18, 24 months.
Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL)
Assessed independently within each cohort using the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) questionnaire. The scale consists of 14 items scored on a Likert scale, with total scores ranging from 0 to 56. Lower overall scores indicate superior OHRQoL and better clinical outcomes.
Time frame: Baseline and 6, 12, 24 months.