Ignite Creation Date:
2026-03-26 @ 3:20 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-04-06 @ 5:15 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT07427602
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2026-02-23
First Post:
2025-11-27
Is Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Immediate Implant Placement and Immediate Restoration With Prefabricated Provisionals
Sponsor:
University Medical Center Groningen
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Immediate Implant Placement and Immediate Restoration With Prefabricated Provisionals: A Retrospective Case Series Study
Status:
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2025-11
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
* Background
* There is a growing tendency to place a provisional restoration immediately following implant placement. Clinical advantages are shortening of treatment duration and soft tissue guiding during healing resulting in better esthetic outcomes. Provisional restorations can be made either chair-side or in the dental laboratory after implant placement. Nowadays, digital planning makes it possible to fabricate the provisional restoration before implant surgery. The advantage of this technique is that the treatment procedure of placement of the provisional restoration immediately after implant placement is much less time consuming for the patient and due to its machined polished character possibly beneficial for soft tissues.
* Main research question The aim of this retrospective case series study, with full digital workflow, is to evaluate single tooth implant treatment after immediate implant placement in the maxillary aesthetic region, with respect to registration of possible complications during the time of placement and evaluation of the prefabricated provisional registration and evaluation of clinical and radiographical performance and aesthetic outcome with the definitive restoration after at least 1 year in function.
* Design (including population, confounders/outcomes) The study design is a retrospective, single-arm observational study for evaluation of 50 patients with a failing tooth in the maxillary aesthetic region, which were treated with an implant-supported provisional and definitive restoration by means of a digital workflow. Outcomes: registration of possible complications during the time of placement and evaluation of the provisional registration and evaluation of clinical and radiographical performance and aesthetic outcome with the definitive restoration.
* Expected results Satisfying results for patients and professionals (VAS-scores and PES/WES-scores).
* There is a growing tendency to place a provisional restoration immediately following implant placement. Clinical advantages are shortening of treatment duration and soft tissue guiding during healing resulting in better esthetic outcomes. Provisional restorations can be made either chair-side or in the dental laboratory after implant placement. Nowadays, digital planning makes it possible to fabricate the provisional restoration before implant surgery. The advantage of this technique is that the treatment procedure of placement of the provisional restoration immediately after implant placement is much less time consuming for the patient and due to its machined polished character possibly beneficial for soft tissues.
* Main research question The aim of this retrospective case series study, with full digital workflow, is to evaluate single tooth implant treatment after immediate implant placement in the maxillary aesthetic region, with respect to registration of possible complications during the time of placement and evaluation of the prefabricated provisional registration and evaluation of clinical and radiographical performance and aesthetic outcome with the definitive restoration after at least 1 year in function.
* Design (including population, confounders/outcomes) The study design is a retrospective, single-arm observational study for evaluation of 50 patients with a failing tooth in the maxillary aesthetic region, which were treated with an implant-supported provisional and definitive restoration by means of a digital workflow. Outcomes: registration of possible complications during the time of placement and evaluation of the provisional registration and evaluation of clinical and radiographical performance and aesthetic outcome with the definitive restoration.
* Expected results Satisfying results for patients and professionals (VAS-scores and PES/WES-scores).
Detailed Description:
BACKGROUND
• Introduction and rationale There is a growing tendency to place a provisional restoration immediately following implant placement. Clinical advantages are shortening of treatment duration and soft tissue guiding during healing resulting in better esthetic outcomes (El Ghoul \& Chidiac, 2012). It was shown that good esthetic results can be achieved with immediate provisionalization of single-tooth implants placed immediately after failing tooth removal (Zuiderveld EG, Meijer HJA, Gareb B, Vissink A, Raghoebar GM, 2024; Donker VJJ, Raghoebar GM, Slagter KW, Hentenaar DFM, Vissink A, Meijer HJA, 2024).
Popularity of immediate implant loading is related to evolving society factors, including more demanding patients and a wish for direct treatment (Huynh-Ba, Oates, \& Williams, 2018). Recent developments in the digital workflow in implant dentistry made treatment planning and fabrication of a provisional restoration before implant placement possible, thus making the treatment more predictable for the clinician and even further shortening the treatment duration. Until date, limited studies have been described investigating immediate provisionalization of single-tooth implants placed immediately after failing tooth removal in the esthetic maxillary zone using a provisional restoration fabricated before implant placement.
• Research question The aim of this retrospective case series study, with full digital workflow, is to evaluate single tooth implant treatment after immediate implant placement in the maxillary aesthetic region, with respect to registration of possible complications during the time of placement and evaluation of the prefabricated provisional registration and evaluation of clinical and radiographical performance and aesthetic outcome with the definitive restoration after at least 1 year in function.
• Introduction and rationale There is a growing tendency to place a provisional restoration immediately following implant placement. Clinical advantages are shortening of treatment duration and soft tissue guiding during healing resulting in better esthetic outcomes (El Ghoul \& Chidiac, 2012). It was shown that good esthetic results can be achieved with immediate provisionalization of single-tooth implants placed immediately after failing tooth removal (Zuiderveld EG, Meijer HJA, Gareb B, Vissink A, Raghoebar GM, 2024; Donker VJJ, Raghoebar GM, Slagter KW, Hentenaar DFM, Vissink A, Meijer HJA, 2024).
Popularity of immediate implant loading is related to evolving society factors, including more demanding patients and a wish for direct treatment (Huynh-Ba, Oates, \& Williams, 2018). Recent developments in the digital workflow in implant dentistry made treatment planning and fabrication of a provisional restoration before implant placement possible, thus making the treatment more predictable for the clinician and even further shortening the treatment duration. Until date, limited studies have been described investigating immediate provisionalization of single-tooth implants placed immediately after failing tooth removal in the esthetic maxillary zone using a provisional restoration fabricated before implant placement.
• Research question The aim of this retrospective case series study, with full digital workflow, is to evaluate single tooth implant treatment after immediate implant placement in the maxillary aesthetic region, with respect to registration of possible complications during the time of placement and evaluation of the prefabricated provisional registration and evaluation of clinical and radiographical performance and aesthetic outcome with the definitive restoration after at least 1 year in function.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: