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
Not provided
Not provided
Clinical and radiographic evaluation of a new modification of ring technique using omputeraided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) milling of allogeneic bone block for anterior maxilla ridge augmentation with immediate implantation
Dental implant failure remains a clinically significant challenge, with early failures typically attributed to insufficient osseointegration, surgical trauma, bacterial contamination, or micromotion during healing. In contrast, late failures are often associated with occlusal overload, peri-implantitis, or implant mispositioning.
These challenges have driven the adoption of allogeneic bone blocks, particularly those fabricated using computeraided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) technology, which offer precise anatomical adaptation, reduced surgical time, and minimized complications compared to manual grafting techniques
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Study group | Experimental | Patients presented with anterior maxillary alveolar bone defects resulting from previous implant failure |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAD/CAM allogenic bone block | Other | CAD/CAM allogenic bone block augmentation with immediate non-functional implant loading |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Vertical/Horizonal Bone Gain | Vertical/Horizonal Bone Gain was measured via cone beam computed tomography superimposition at 18 months | 18 months post-procedure |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Implant Survival Rate | Implant survival rate, defined as the absence of clinical mobility, peri-implant infection, persistent pain, or radiographic evidence of peri-implant radiolucency or bone loss beyond expected physiological remodelling. Implant stability was assessed clinically using percussion and mobility tests, and radiographically using periapical radiographs and/or cone-beam computed tomography at designated follow-up intervals. Survival was evaluated at 6, 12, and 18 months postoperatively |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cairo University | Cairo | 12613 | Egypt |
The data will be available upon a reasonable request from the corresponding author after the end of study for one year.
After the end of study for one year.
The data will be available upon a reasonable request from the corresponding author.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| 18 months post-procedure |
| Assessment of aesthetic outcome | Assessment of aesthetic outcome were assessed using the Pink Esthetic Score (PES), a validated clinical index that evaluates seven soft tissue parameters around the implant site: mesial and distal papillae, soft tissue level, soft tissue contour, alveolar process deficiency, soft tissue color, and texture. PES was evaluated at 12 and 18 months by two calibrated examiners blinded to the treatment allocation. | 18 months post-procedure |
| Patient Satisfaction | Patient-reported satisfaction with the aesthetic and functional outcomes was measured using a 10-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Patients were asked to rate their satisfaction with the final restoration, including perceived appearance, comfort, and chewing efficiency at 12 and 18 months postoperatively. Mean VAS scores were analyzed and compared over time. | 18 months post-procedure |