There is no long term prospective clinical research based on the principle of direct loading (within 24 hours) of overdentures on 2 implants with a bar in the mandible. Recently, for the period of 12 months, a pilot study has been carried out…
ID
Source
Brief title
Condition
- Other condition
Synonym
Health condition
Edentate proefpersonen
Research involving
Sponsors and support
Intervention
Outcome measures
Primary outcome
During several points in time, the following parameters are registered:
- patient satisfaction
- total treatment costs
- total treatment time
- total prosthetic aftercare
- bone level around implants by the use of standardized x-rays
- periodontal parameters
- implant stability
Secondary outcome
Microbiolologic annd genetic factors that might play a role in the etiology of
peri-implant infection.
Background summary
Recent literature shows that implant supported prostheses are a significant
improvement when compared to conventional prostheses. A lower jaw with severe
resorption frequently causes problems, functionally as well as socially.
Several authors describe treatment concepts for the edentulous mandible, such
as an overdenture on two implants, attached by balls or by a bar. In addition,
an overdenture on 4 implants attached by a bar and a rigid bridge on 4 or more
implants are described. There is an agreement in literature that the use of
overdentures on 2 implants is a reliable treatment modality in the edentulous
mandible.
Overdentures on 2 implants interconnected by a bar are an improvement in
patient satisfaction and quality of life when compared to full conventional
prostheses. Moreover, these overdentures seem to be a financially favorable
treatment option when compared to the alternative options mentioned above. A
number of authors even have the opinion that this option is to be preferred
when treating the edentulous mandible.
For a long period, an osseointegration phase of 3 to 6 months was considered to
be essential to accomplish predictable treatment outcomes. Recent clinical and
experimental research regarding early and direct loading have actually revealed
that successful osseointegration can be accomplished. Furthermore, a lot has
been published about topography and chemical additions of the implant surface.
Both aspects are able to enhance osseointegration. Certain surfaces, such as
those of SLActive implants, have a positive effect on primary implant
stability. Possible advantages of shorter healing times prior to implant
loading are a reduction in treatment time, lower costs and higher patient
satisfaction. However, there is still no consensus because of a lack of long
term prospective research.
Study objective
There is no long term prospective clinical research based on the principle of
direct loading (within 24 hours) of overdentures on 2 implants with a bar in
the mandible. Recently, for the period of 12 months, a pilot study has been
carried out including 64 healthy adults. No complications were revealed.
The good results of the pilot have been the motivation to start a multi centre
randomized controlled clinical trial. Conventional loading (after 6 weeks) of
an overdenture on 2 standard SLA implants with a bar are compared to direct
loading of the similar construction on 2 SLActive implants.
In addition, microbiological and genetic factors are studied that might play a
role in the etiology of peri-implant infections.
Study design
A multi centre randomized controlled clinical trial
Study burden and risks
After selection based on determined criteria, 92 patients are allocated at
random in 2 treatment centres. During several points in time, the following
parameters are registered:
- patient satisfaction
- total treatment costs
- total treatment time
- total prosthetic aftercare
- bone level around implants by the use of standardized x-rays
- periodontal parameters
- implant stability
The estimated extra time amounts to 1 hour a year.
Louwesweg 1
1066 EA Amsterdam
NL
Louwesweg 1
1066 EA Amsterdam
NL
Listed location countries
Age
Inclusion criteria
1) The study object must be fully edentulous for a minimal period of 1 year.
2) The study object must have a minimal intraforaminal bone height of at least 8 mm measured on a lateral cephelometric radiograph.
3) The study object must agree to a treatment allocation in any of the two groups.
4) The study object must have suitable bone quality as assessed radio graphically
(Lekholm & Zarb 1985).
5) The implants must be initially stable and inserted with at least 35 ncm torque.
Exclusion criteria
1) Physical and mental disabilities which interfere with the maintenance of implants;
2) Severe skeletal jaw discrepancies
3) Severe clenching habits
4) Those that have already received or lost implants
5) Those who abuse drugs or alcohol
6) Having received radiotherapy to the head and neck region for malignancies
7) Heaving smokers (more than a packet a day)
8) Undergoing chemotherapy
9) Systemic and local bone disorders and pathology
10) Immuno-compromised patients, including those with HIV
Design
Recruitment
Followed up by the following (possibly more current) registration
No registrations found.
Other (possibly less up-to-date) registrations in this register
No registrations found.
In other registers
Register | ID |
---|---|
CCMO | NL16723.029.07 |