Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=20 Randomized Double-blind Treatment

A Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Laser-Ablated Implant-Abutments to Promote Tissue Healing

Jaw, Edentulous, Partially

Enrolled (actual)
20
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Jan 2017
Primary outcome: Primary: Number od Participants With Consistent Connective Tissue Integration at a Histologic Level — 10; 10 participants

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
N/A
Interventions
Dental implant-abutments (Device)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 19+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Primary completion
Aug 2014

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Number od Participants With Consistent Connective Tissue Integration at a Histologic Level
10; 10
SECONDARY
Grams of Force Needed to Disrupt Tissue Attachment to the Abutment
SECONDARY
Mean Change in Millimeters of Clinical Attachment to the Abutment
SECONDARY
Mean Change in Millimeters of Clinical Attachment to the Abutment
SECONDARY
Mean Change in Millimeters of Clinical Attachment to the Abutment
SECONDARY
Mean Change in Millimeters of Clinical Attachment to the Abutment

Summary

The purpose of this study is to determine which implant-abutment design is more likely to promote early soft-tissue healing processes and/or will enhance longitudinal peri-implant bone and soft-tissue health.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • At least 19 years old
  • Healthy enough to under go treatment
  • Have one or more edentulous sites that exhibit adequate natural bone and sufficient keratinized tissue
  • Demonstrated willingness to undergo study treatment and to comply with study timeline -

Exclusion Criteria

  • Full edentulism
  • Any chronic health condition or medication that in the opinion of the investigators may adversely affect bone healing
  • Any indication of an inability to make autonomous decisions

-

View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01822223). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search