Clinical Trials Directory

Trials / Unknown

UnknownNCT02941575

Patient Satisfaction and Peri-Implant Tissue Success of Hybrid Ceramic Versus E-Max Superstructures

Esthetic Patient Satisfaction and Peri-Implant Tissue Success of Crystal Ultra Hybrid Ceramic Compared to E-Max Superstructures in Esthetic Zone

Status
Unknown
Phase
N/A
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
22 (estimated)
Sponsor
Cairo University · Academic / Other
Sex
All
Age
18 Years – 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
Accepted

Summary

In patients receiving implants in the esthetic zone, would the use of new Nano hybrid ceramic crown material (Crystal Ultra) improve esthetic patient satisfaction and peri-implant tissue success when compared with Lithium Disilicate crown (E-max)?

Detailed description

The patient will be treated in visits designated as follows: Visit 1: Preoperative records, face-to-face adherence reminder session, signing consents, clinical, radiographic examination and primary impression for diagnostic cast construction. Visit 2: (first stage surgery): implant placement surgical procedure and postoperative radiograph. Visit 3: After 3months (second stage surgery): re-opening of surgical site, placement of healing abutments and temporary crowns. Visit 4: After 2 weeks, removing of temporary restorations and taking of final impressions Visit 5: placement of different ceramic crown superstructures and recording different outcome values.

Conditions

Interventions

TypeNameDescription
OTHERCrystal UltraCrystal Ultra: is a resin nano-ceramic material, that combines both advantages of ceramics and composites.
OTHERAll ceramicIPS Emax: is an all ceramic crown that has proven superior aesthetics and strength properties.

Timeline

Start date
2016-12-01
Primary completion
2018-03-01
Completion
2018-05-01
First posted
2016-10-21
Last updated
2016-10-21

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT02941575. Inclusion in this directory is not an endorsement.