Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The Straumann Bone Level Tapered (BLT) implant Ø 2.9 mm implant was developed to allow treatment of patients with single tooth gaps of small dimensions in the lateral and central incisor positions in the mandible and in the lateral incisor positions in the maxilla. These positions are reduced-load-bearing compared to more posterior positions.
During this study performance and safety of the Straumann BLT implants Ø 2.9 mm in the clinical practice setting will be investigated.
This is a multi-center, prospective, single cohort, post-market clinical follow-up (PMCF) study. The total study duration for each patient should be 12 ± 1 months.
Straumann BLT implants Ø 2.9 mm will be placed in central and lateral incisors in the mandible and lateral incisors in the maxilla for single tooth replacement, followed by provisional prosthetic loading after 6 ± 2 weeks and by final prosthetic loading 4 ± 1 months after implant placements.
In total 7 visits per patient are scheduled in this study. Implant survival, PES, implant success, bone level changes and adverse events (AEs) will be assessed.
The investigational device is a CE-(Conformité Européenne, meaning European Conformity) marked product. Straumann BLT implants Ø 2.9 mm Roxolid SLActive (sand blasted, large grit, acid etched surface) are available in lengths of 10, 12 and 14 mm.
Four centers in Germany will participate. The study and any amendments will be performed as far as possible according to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14155 and conform to the Declaration of Helsinki (last revision Fortaleza 2013) and local legal and regulatory requirements.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| BLT Implant Ø 2.9 mm | Experimental | The Straumann BLT Implants Ø 2.9 mm are available with a length of 10, 12 and 14 mm. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BLT Implant Ø 2.9 mm | Device | Placement of Straumann BLT implants Ø 2.9 mm in central and lateral incisors in the mandible and lateral incisors in the maxilla for single tooth replacement followed by prosthetic loading. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Implant Survival Rate at 12 Months After Implant Placement | A "surviving implant" is an implant stably inserted in the subject's jaw bone at the time of assessment. | 12 months after implant placement |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Pink Esthetic Score (PES) at 6 Months After Implant Placement | The Pink esthetic score allows an objective evaluation of peri-implant soft tissue of single tooth implants based on 7 variables and is highly reproducible. Each variable will be assessed using a 0-1-2 scoring system; 0 being the lowest, and 2 being the highest value. The minimum achievable PES is 0 and the maximum score is 14. The higher the value, the better the outcome. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Implant Success Rate at 12 Months After Implant Placement | A "successful implant" is an implant where all of the following success criteria (according to Buser et al., 1992) apply:
|
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Keyvan Sagheb, Dr. | Universitätsmedizin der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Klinik für Mund-Kiefer-Gesichtschirurgie, Plastische Operationen | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kieferchirurgische Gemeinschaftspraxis Dr. Dr. Stroink & Kollegen | Düsseldorf | 40210 | Germany | |||
| Medi+ |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10337309 | Background | Steinemann SG. Titanium--the material of choice? Periodontol 2000. 1998 Jun;17:7-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0757.1998.tb00119.x. No abstract available. | |
| 20586785 | Background | Gottlow J, Dard M, Kjellson F, Obrecht M, Sennerby L. Evaluation of a new titanium-zirconium dental implant: a biomechanical and histological comparative study in the mini pig. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 Aug;14(4):538-45. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00289.x. Epub 2010 Jun 25. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This was a non-randomized study (N/A).
First site was initiated on 11th DEC 2015 (Mainz University). The first patient was included on 12 FEB 2016 and the last patient out was on 07 JUN 2019 (last 1-year follow-up). The last centre was closed on 10 DEC 2019 (Münster).
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | BLT Implant Ø 2.9 mm | The Straumann BLT Implants Ø 2.9 mm are available with a length of 10, 12 and 14 mm. BLT Implant Ø 2.9 mm: Placement of Straumann BLT implants Ø 2.9 mm in central and lateral incisors in the mandible and lateral incisors in the maxilla for single tooth replacement followed by prosthetic loading. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
|
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | BLT Implant Ø 2.9 mm | The Straumann BLT Implants Ø 2.9 mm are available with a length of 10, 12 and 14 mm. BLT Implant Ø 2.9 mm: Placement of Straumann BLT implants Ø 2.9 mm in central and lateral incisors in the mandible and lateral incisors in the maxilla for single tooth replacement followed by prosthetic loading. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Implant Survival Rate at 12 Months After Implant Placement | A "surviving implant" is an implant stably inserted in the subject's jaw bone at the time of assessment. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 12 months after implant placement |
|
|
1 year
Adverse Events were recorded at every patient visit and monitored during IMV. Safety Board meetings were conducted to assess the reported and monitored AEs from a Sponsor-Perspective.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | BLT Implant Ø 2.9 mm | The Straumann BLT Implants Ø 2.9 mm are available with a length of 10, 12 and 14 mm. BLT Implant Ø 2.9 mm: Placement of Straumann BLT implants Ø 2.9 mm in central and lateral incisors in the mandible and lateral incisors in the maxilla for single tooth replacement followed by prosthetic loading. |
Not provided
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Implant lost | Surgical and medical procedures | ISO14155 | Systematic Assessment | Implant lost on pos. 22, subject discontinued. |
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dr. Michael McCaskey, Team Leader Clinical Research | Institut Straumann AG | +41619651741 | michael.mccaskey@straumann.com |
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP | Yes | Yes | No | Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan | Aug 9, 2017 | Aug 25, 2020 | Prot_SAP_000.pdf |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D016388 | Tooth Loss |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010510 | Periodontal Diseases |
| D009059 | Mouth Diseases |
| D009057 | Stomatognathic Diseases |
| D014076 | Tooth Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| 6 months after implant placement |
| 12 months after implant placement |
| Marginal Bone Level Changes at 12 Months After Implant Placement | An independent expert is contracted to perform the bone level measurements from the X-rays. The vertical bone level is evaluated by measuring the distance from the implant shoulder to the first visible bone contact on the implant. Measurements are taken at the mesial and distal aspects of the implant, and an average value is calculated. Mean bone level changes are computed by subtracting the average bone level at 12 months after implant placement from the average bone level at baseline (implant placement). Hence, negative bone level changes are representing bone loss; vice versa positive changes representing bone gain. Measurements take into account distortion based on changes on the radiograph from the true dimension of the implant. | Baseline and 12 months after implant placement |
| Incidence of Adverse Events and Adverse Device Effects | At each visit the Investigator should determine if any adverse events occurred since the last study visit by speaking with the patient and reviewing any dental and medical records. These AEs, along with any AEs from the current study visit, should be documented and reported as described in Section 8 of the protocol. In addition the Investigator should evaluate the status of any ongoing AEs throughout the study. | Screening, Baseline, 7-14 days after implant placement, 6 weeks after implant placement, 4 months after implant placement, 6 months after implant placement and 12 months after implant placement |
| Mainz |
| 55128 |
| Germany |
| Universitätsmedizin der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Klinik für Mund-Kiefer-Gesichtschirurgie, Plastische Operationen | Mainz | 55131 | Germany |
| Universitätsklinikum Münster, Klinik für Mund-, Kiefer- und Gesichtschirurgie | Münster | 48149 | Germany |
| Kieferchirurgische Praxen Hentschel & Herrmann | Zwickau | 08056 | Germany |
| 7593037 | Background | Kobayashi E, Matsumoto S, Doi H, Yoneyama T, Hamanaka H. Mechanical properties of the binary titanium-zirconium alloys and their potential for biomedical materials. J Biomed Mater Res. 1995 Aug;29(8):943-50. doi: 10.1002/jbm.820290805. |
| 21414131 | Background | Al-Nawas B, Bragger U, Meijer HJ, Naert I, Persson R, Perucchi A, Quirynen M, Raghoebar GM, Reichert TE, Romeo E, Santing HJ, Schimmel M, Storelli S, ten Bruggenkate C, Vandekerckhove B, Wagner W, Wismeijer D, Muller F. A double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) of Titanium-13Zirconium versus Titanium Grade IV small-diameter bone level implants in edentulous mandibles--results from a 1-year observation period. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 Dec;14(6):896-904. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00324.x. Epub 2011 Mar 17. |
| 24015975 | Background | Benic GI, Gallucci GO, Mokti M, Hammerle CH, Weber HP, Jung RE. Titanium-zirconium narrow-diameter versus titanium regular-diameter implants for anterior and premolar single crowns: 1-year results of a randomized controlled clinical study. J Clin Periodontol. 2013 Nov;40(11):1052-61. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12156. Epub 2013 Sep 8. |
| 24666383 | Background | Al-Nawas B, Domagala P, Fragola G, Freiberger P, Ortiz-Vigon A, Rousseau P, Tondela J. A Prospective Noninterventional Study to Evaluate Survival and Success of Reduced Diameter Implants Made From Titanium-Zirconium Alloy. J Oral Implantol. 2015 Aug;41(4):e118-25. doi: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-13-00149. Epub 2014 Mar 25. |
| 24713048 | Background | Quirynen M, Al-Nawas B, Meijer HJ, Razavi A, Reichert TE, Schimmel M, Storelli S, Romeo E; Roxolid Study Group. Small-diameter titanium Grade IV and titanium-zirconium implants in edentulous mandibles: three-year results from a double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Jul;26(7):831-40. doi: 10.1111/clr.12367. Epub 2014 Apr 9. |
| 24660189 | Background | Klein MO, Schiegnitz E, Al-Nawas B. Systematic review on success of narrow-diameter dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29 Suppl:43-54. doi: 10.11607/jomi.2014suppl.g1.3. |
| 15635943 | Background | Hammerle CH, Chen ST, Wilson TG Jr. Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding the placement of implants in extraction sockets. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19 Suppl:26-8. No abstract available. |
| 3507627 | Background | Mombelli A, van Oosten MA, Schurch E Jr, Land NP. The microbiota associated with successful or failing osseointegrated titanium implants. Oral Microbiol Immunol. 1987 Dec;2(4):145-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-302x.1987.tb00298.x. No abstract available. |
| 15635945 | Background | Buser D, Martin W, Belser UC. Optimizing esthetics for implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: anatomic and surgical considerations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19 Suppl:43-61. |
| 16307569 | Background | Furhauser R, Florescu D, Benesch T, Haas R, Mailath G, Watzek G. Evaluation of soft tissue around single-tooth implant crowns: the pink esthetic score. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005 Dec;16(6):639-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01193.x. |
| 19681932 | Background | Laurell L, Lundgren D. Marginal bone level changes at dental implants after 5 years in function: a meta-analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2011 Mar;13(1):19-28. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00182.x. |
| 37725234 | Derived | Walter C, Sagheb K, Blatt S, Klein MO, Herrmann J, Kleinheinz J, Al-Nawas B. Evaluation of the clinical safety and performance of a narrow diameter (2.9 mm) bone-level implant: a 1-year prospective single-arm multicenter study. Int J Implant Dent. 2023 Sep 19;9(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s40729-023-00495-x. |
| years |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
| Participants |
|
|
| Secondary | Pink Esthetic Score (PES) at 6 Months After Implant Placement | The Pink esthetic score allows an objective evaluation of peri-implant soft tissue of single tooth implants based on 7 variables and is highly reproducible. Each variable will be assessed using a 0-1-2 scoring system; 0 being the lowest, and 2 being the highest value. The minimum achievable PES is 0 and the maximum score is 14. The higher the value, the better the outcome. | 11 missing values. | Posted | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval | score on a scale | 6 months after implant placement |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Implant Success Rate at 12 Months After Implant Placement | A "successful implant" is an implant where all of the following success criteria (according to Buser et al., 1992) apply:
| 2 missing values. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 12 months after implant placement |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Marginal Bone Level Changes at 12 Months After Implant Placement | An independent expert is contracted to perform the bone level measurements from the X-rays. The vertical bone level is evaluated by measuring the distance from the implant shoulder to the first visible bone contact on the implant. Measurements are taken at the mesial and distal aspects of the implant, and an average value is calculated. Mean bone level changes are computed by subtracting the average bone level at 12 months after implant placement from the average bone level at baseline (implant placement). Hence, negative bone level changes are representing bone loss; vice versa positive changes representing bone gain. Measurements take into account distortion based on changes on the radiograph from the true dimension of the implant. | Posted | Mean | 95% Confidence Interval | mm | Baseline and 12 months after implant placement |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Incidence of Adverse Events and Adverse Device Effects | At each visit the Investigator should determine if any adverse events occurred since the last study visit by speaking with the patient and reviewing any dental and medical records. These AEs, along with any AEs from the current study visit, should be documented and reported as described in Section 8 of the protocol. In addition the Investigator should evaluate the status of any ongoing AEs throughout the study. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Screening, Baseline, 7-14 days after implant placement, 6 weeks after implant placement, 4 months after implant placement, 6 months after implant placement and 12 months after implant placement |
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 41 |
| 0 |
| 41 |
| 10 |
| 41 |
|
| Common cold | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | ISO14155 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Inflammation | General disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Diarrhea | Gastrointestinal disorders | Systematic Assessment |
|
Not provided
| Serious Adverse Device Effects |
|
| Unanticipated Serious Adv. Device Effect (USADE) |
|
| No AEs |
|