NCT07512258

To Compare the Two Implant Placement Protocols to Evaluate Placement Accuracy and Post-operative Healing of the Implant

Assessment of Two Implant Placement Protocols to Evaluate Placement Accuracy and Post-Operative Healing

• Status: Not Yet Recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 40 (estimated)
• Sponsor: University of Alabama at Birmingham · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years – 85 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Accepted

Summary

The goal of this study is to evaluate two commonly utilized surgical guide protocols to determine dental implant placement accuracy compared to pre-operative computerized planning, post-operative healing and bone levels to 12-months post-placement, and patient assessed post-operative discomfort and healing using a visual acuity scale (VAS).

Detailed description

This proposed study would allow us to assess the use of two intraoperative surgical guide protocols in common use in dental practice (matrix-based pilot drill guided and fully digital guided) for implant placement surgical procedure.

Conditions

• Dental Implant

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
PROCEDURE	Pilot Drill Guide (PDG)	Matrix-based pilot drill guides fabricated using casts derived from digital wax ups of the proposed final restoration based upon initial implant planning and will be placed using the standard manufacturer's protocol.
PROCEDURE	Fully Guided (FG)	3-D printed guides fabricated based upon digital wax ups and will be placed using the standard manufacturer's protocol and guided implant placement kits.

Timeline

• Start date: 2026-06-01
• Primary completion: 2027-07-01
• Completion: 2028-07-01
• First posted: 2026-04-06
• Last updated: 2026-04-06

Locations

1 site across 1 country: United States