Ignite Creation Date:
2024-06-16 @ 11:48 AM
Last Modification Date:
2024-10-26 @ 3:30 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT06425770
Status:
RECRUITING
Last Update Posted:
2024-05-22
First Post:
2024-05-06
Brief Title:
Digital vs Conventional Impression in Capturing the Emergence Profile Around Maxillary Anterior Implant-supported Crowns
Sponsor:
Semmelweis University
Organization:
Semmelweis University
Study Overview
Official Title:
Investigating the Accuracy of Conventional vs Digital Impressions and Conventional vs 3D Fabricated Casts in Capturing the Emergence Profile Around Maxillary Anterior Single Implant-supported Crowns
Status:
RECRUITING
Status Verified Date:
2024-01
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:
This study compares conventional impression and cast fabrication to directindirect digital scannig and 3D printed casts regarding their accuracy in replicating the peri-implant emergence profile of single implants in the maxillary anterior region FDI 15-25
Detailed Description:
Correct design of the peri-implant emergence profile EP is crucial for maintaining the health of the supracrestal complex and long-term success of the implant implant-prosthodontics After its formation with a provisional restoration its shape needs to be transferred to the final restoration via conventional elastomeric or digital directindirect impression taking
Our aims are to investigate around maxillary anterior single implants in patients with thick gingival phenotype
1 the accuracy of direct digital impression vs indirect digital impression vs conventional elastomeric impression in capturing the EP and implant position
2 the accuracy of 3D printed cast with conventional gingival mask vs conventional epoxy-resin cast with gingival mask in replicating the EP and implant position
3 the amount of soft tissue collapse at 021020 minutes following the removal of the provisional restoration in case of direct EP scanning
Our aims are to investigate around maxillary anterior single implants in patients with thick gingival phenotype
1 the accuracy of direct digital impression vs indirect digital impression vs conventional elastomeric impression in capturing the EP and implant position
2 the accuracy of 3D printed cast with conventional gingival mask vs conventional epoxy-resin cast with gingival mask in replicating the EP and implant position
3 the amount of soft tissue collapse at 021020 minutes following the removal of the provisional restoration in case of direct EP scanning
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
None
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?:
None