Partially Edentulous Maxilla, MandibleNCT07393269
Accuracy of Scannable Healing Abutments for Implant Impressions
A study testing Digital implant impression using scannable healing abutments, Open-tray implant impression and Closed-tray implant impression in people with Partially Edentulous Maxilla, Mandible, run by Sherif Aly Sadek at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
This prospective controlled clinical trial evaluates the three-dimensional positional accuracy of implant-level impressions obtained using scannable healing abutments compared with conventional open-tray and closed-tray impression techniques in partially edentulous patients with unilateral free-end saddle situations. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 40 to 70 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Partially Edentulous Maxilla, Mandible
- What is being tested?
- Digital implant impression using scannable healing abutments, Open-tray implant impression and Closed-tray implant impression
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 22 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 2 Jul 2025to 10 Nov 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 40 to 70 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Partially edentulous patients with unilateral free-end saddle (Kennedy Class II)
- Adequate bone for two implants
- Good systemic health
- Ability to provide informed consent
Who cannot join
- Active periodontal disease
- Poor oral hygiene
- Parafunctional habits
- Temporomandibular disorders
- Heavy smoking (>10 cigarettes/day)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Accuracy of Implant Impression Techniques Using Scannable Healing Abutments Versus Conventional Methods. A Controlled Clinical Trial
This prospective controlled clinical trial evaluates the three-dimensional positional accuracy of implant-level impressions obtained using scannable healing abutments compared with conventional open-tray and closed-tray impression techniques in partially edentulous patients with unilateral free-end saddle situations.
Read the detailed description
Accurate transfer of implant position is critical for achieving passive fit of implant-supported prostheses. This study compares the trueness of implant impressions obtained using a digital workflow based on scannable healing abutments with conventional open-tray and closed-tray impression techniques. Twenty-two partially edentulous patients with unilateral distal extension ridges will undergo all three impression techniques. Three-dimensional deviations will be quantified using best-fit superimposition and root mean square analysis, with the open-tray technique serving as the reference standard.
- Conditions
- Partially Edentulous Maxilla, Mandible
- Being tested
- Digital implant impression using scannable healing abutments, Open-tray implant impression, Closed-tray implant impression
- Keywords
- Dental Impression Technique, Intraoral Scanning, Partial Edentulism, Digital Dentistry, Dental Implants
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Digital implant impression using scannable healing abutmentsProcedure or surgery
Digital acquisition of implant position using intraoral scanning of scannable healing abutments following second-stage surgery.
Open-tray implant impressionProcedure or surgery
Conventional open-tray implant-level impression using splinted impression copings and polyvinyl siloxane material.
Closed-tray implant impressionProcedure or surgery
Conventional closed-tray implant-level impression using transfer copings and polyvinyl siloxane material.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Scannable Healing Abutment Digital Impression | Experimental | Intraoral digital impression using scannable healing abutments and an intraoral scanner. Receives: Procedure: Digital implant impression using scannable healing abutments |
| Open-Tray Conventional Impression | Active comparator | Conventional splinted open-tray implant impression using polyvinyl siloxane. Receives: Procedure: Open-tray implant impression |
| Closed-Tray Conventional Impression | Active comparator | Conventional closed-tray implant impression using polyvinyl siloxane. Receives: Procedure: Closed-tray implant impression |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Three-dimensional implant positional accuracy (RMS deviation)
Root mean square (RMS) deviation (µm) between test impressions and the open-tray reference model using 3D metrology software.
Measured: Periprocedural (single assessment, 1 week after second-stage implant surgery)
Secondary outcomes (1)
Comparison of implant positional accuracy between impression techniques
Pairwise comparison of RMS deviation values among scannable healing abutment, open-tray, and closed-tray impression techniques
Measured: Periprocedural (single assessment, 1 week after second-stage implant surgery)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Feb 2026
- Study start2 Jul 2025
- Primary completion20 Oct 2025
- Study completion10 Nov 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Partially Edentulous Maxilla, MandibleStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 22 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Sherif Aly Sadek
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Sherif Aly Sadek, Cairo University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07393269
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 33-6-25
- Status last verified
- Jan 2026
- First submitted
- 24 Jan 2026
- Last updated
- 6 Feb 2026
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Individual participant data will not be shared. The data generated in this study include identifiable clinical and radiographic measurements that are specific to the study protocol and participants. De-identified aggregate data are reported in the published manuscript.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 6 Feb 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Accuracy of Implant Impression Techniques Using Scannable Healing Abutments Versus Conventional Methods. A Controlled Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07393269
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 33-6-25
- Conditions
- Partially Edentulous Maxilla, Mandible
- Keywords
- Dental Impression Technique, Intraoral Scanning, Partial Edentulism, Digital Dentistry, Dental Implants
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 22 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Sherif Aly SadekUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 2 Jul 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 20 Oct 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 10 Nov 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 6 Feb 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This prospective controlled clinical trial evaluates the three-dimensional positional accuracy of implant-level impressions obtained using scannable healing abutments compared with conventional open-tray and closed-tray impression techniques in partially edentulous patients with unilateral free-end saddle situations.
Detailed description
Accurate transfer of implant position is critical for achieving passive fit of implant-supported prostheses. This study compares the trueness of implant impressions obtained using a digital workflow based on scannable healing abutments with conventional open-tray and closed-tray impression techniques. Twenty-two partially edentulous patients with unilateral distal extension ridges will undergo all three impression techniques. Three-dimensional deviations will be quantified using best-fit superimposition and root mean square analysis, with the open-tray technique serving as the reference standard.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Scannable Healing Abutment Digital Impression | Experimental | Procedure: Digital implant impression using scannable healing abutmentsIntraoral digital impression using scannable healing abutments and an intraoral scanner. |
| Open-Tray Conventional Impression | Active comparator | Procedure: Open-tray implant impressionConventional splinted open-tray implant impression using polyvinyl siloxane. |
| Closed-Tray Conventional Impression | Active comparator | Procedure: Closed-tray implant impressionConventional closed-tray implant impression using polyvinyl siloxane. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 40 to 70 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Partially edentulous patients with unilateral free-end saddle (Kennedy Class II)
- Adequate bone for two implants
- Good systemic health
- Ability to provide informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Active periodontal disease
- Poor oral hygiene
- Parafunctional habits
- Temporomandibular disorders
- Heavy smoking (>10 cigarettes/day)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Digital implant impression using scannable healing abutmentsDigital acquisition of implant position using intraoral scanning of scannable healing abutments following second-stage surgery. | Procedure or surgery | Scannable Healing Abutment Digital Impression |
| Open-tray implant impressionConventional open-tray implant-level impression using splinted impression copings and polyvinyl siloxane material. | Procedure or surgery | Open-Tray Conventional Impression |
| Closed-tray implant impressionConventional closed-tray implant-level impression using transfer copings and polyvinyl siloxane material. | Procedure or surgery | Closed-Tray Conventional Impression |
Primary outcome
Three-dimensional implant positional accuracy (RMS deviation)
Time frame: Periprocedural (single assessment, 1 week after second-stage implant surgery)
Root mean square (RMS) deviation (µm) between test impressions and the open-tray reference model using 3D metrology software.
1 secondary outcome
Comparison of implant positional accuracy between impression techniques
Time frame: Periprocedural (single assessment, 1 week after second-stage implant surgery)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 6 Feb 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Individual participant data will not be shared. The data generated in this study include identifiable clinical and radiographic measurements that are specific to the study protocol and participants. De-identified aggregate data are reported in the published manuscript.
Related trials for Partially Edentulous Maxilla, Mandible
Active, not recruiting
Non-Guided vs. Guided Surgery to Immediately Loaded PrimeTaper Implants in Partially Edentulous Patients
Partially Edentulous Maxilla or Mandible
Active, not recruiting
Fully Versus Partially Guided Implants Placement: Measurement of Accuracy of Implant Position and Passivity of Superstructures.
Completely Edentulous, Implant Assesment
Not yet recruiting
Peri-implant Bone Formation of Grafted Sites Around Hydrophilic and Non-hydrophilic Dental Implants
Partially Edentulous Maxilla, Partially Edentulous Mandible
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Digital implant impression using scannable healing abutments, Open-tray implant impression and Closed-tray implant impression in people with Partially Edentulous Maxilla, Mandible, run by Sherif Aly Sadek at 1 site in Egypt.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 6 Feb 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Egypt. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Three-dimensional implant positional accuracy (RMS deviation) (time frame: Periprocedural (single assessment, 1 week after second-stage implant surgery)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 6 Feb 2026.