NCT07061418

3D Evaluation of Free-handed-Countersink Guided and Fully Guided Implant Surgery in Partially Edentulous Patients

Completed NA Last updated 11 July 2025

What this trial tests

NA trial testing Dental Implant in Partially Edentulous Jaw in 15 participants. Completed in 25 May 2023.

Timeline

23 February 2023

Primary endpoint
25 May 2023

25 May 2023

Quick facts

Lead sponsor	Islamic University of Caza, Gaza, Palestine
Phase	NA
Status	Completed
Study type	INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation	randomized
Design	parallel
Masking	none
Primary purpose	treatment
Enrollment	15
Start date	23 February 2023
Primary completion	25 May 2023
Estimated completion	25 May 2023
Sites	1 location across Palestinian Territories

Drugs / interventions tested

• Dental Implant

Conditions studied

• Partially Edentulous Jaw — all drugs for Partially Edentulous Jaw →
• Accuracy of Dental Implant Placement — all drugs for Accuracy of Dental Implant Placement →
• Implant Deviation and Positioning Errors — all drugs for Implant Deviation and Positioning Errors →
• Proximity to Anatomical Structures — all drugs for Proximity to Anatomical Structures →

Sponsor

Islamic University of Caza, Gaza, Palestine

Who can join

Adults 18 to 53, any sex, with Partially Edentulous Jaw or Accuracy of Dental Implant Placement. Patients with the condition only — healthy volunteers not accepted.

Sponsor's own description

This clinical trial with a quasi-experimental design investigates the accuracy of dental implant placement using three different surgical approaches: free-handed countersink guided, fully-guided, and traditional freehand techniques in partially edentulous patients. Dental implant therapy not only requires successful osseointegration but also a precise three-dimensional placement to ensure functional and esthetic outcomes. Accurate implant positioning is vital to prevent complications and ensure long-term stability. The evolution of digital technology has led to the development of computer-assisted implant surgery, enhancing surgical precision and minimizing the chances of deviation from planned positions.

In this study, implants were placed in the same patients on both sides of the jaw using two techniques for comparison - one side received a free-handed countersink guided implant, while the other used a fully-guided surgical guide. Patients included in this research were partially dentate adults with adequate oral health, bone volume, and no systemic conditions or habits that could interfere with healing. Pre-operative and post-operative cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were used to evaluate the positional accuracy of the implants.

The three-dimensional evaluation method utilized Blue Sky Plan 4 and 3D Slicer software to superimpose and analyze implant placements. Parameters such as angular deviation, crestal global deviation, apical global deviation, vertical linear deviation, lateral linear deviation, apical vertical deviation, apical lateral deviation, and distances from anatomical structures like the inferior alveolar nerve and the maxillary sinus were measured to assess placement accuracy. Measurements were taken using automatic image registration and STL superimposition of planned versus actual implant locations.

Data collected was analyzed using SPSS software. Both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were conducted. The results aimed to determine the accuracy differences between countersink-guided and fully-guided implant techniques. The findings of this study contribute to evidence-based clinical decisions in implant dentistry by exploring if countersink-guided approaches offer comparable accuracy to fully-guided methods, thus supporting safer and more effective dental implant procedures in clinical practice.

Publications & conference data

No peer-reviewed publications indexed yet for this trial. Completed trials usually publish results within 12-18 months.