Guided Bone Regeneration With Particulate Versus Block Graft

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

30 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2017-01-10

Study Completion Date

2018-04-10

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The aim of present study was to compare two bone augmentation techniques (Guided Bone Regeneration, GBR, with autogenous block graft and GBR with particulate autograft plus xenograft) in terms of efficacy, complications, operational parameters (cost of the materials used, time for patient preparation, time for surgery, fatigue of the physician caused by surgery) tolerability by the patient and patient comfort.

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Ridge Augmentation: Particulate v/s Block Graft

NCT02487784

Alveolar Bone Loss

COMPLETED NA

GBR Versus Allogenic Bone Block

NCT07295041

Alveolar Bone Grafting Implant Placement

COMPLETED NA

Horizontal Maxillary Ridge Augmentation With Sticky Bone Versus Collagen Membrane GBR

NCT03697616

Horizontal Deficiecy in Maxillary Arches

UNKNOWN NA

Three-dimensional Bone Regeneration Using Custom-made Meshes With and Without Collagen Membrane

NCT04286334

Surgical Procedure, Unspecified Soft Tissue Infections Surgical Wound Dehiscence +2 more

COMPLETED NA

Vertical Ridge Augmentation With Autogenous Onlay Blocks Combined With Guided Bone Regeneration Versus Autogenous Bone Graft With Titanium Mesh in Posterior Mandible

NCT03680118

Posterior Mandible With Deficient Ridge Height

UNKNOWN NA

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The aim of present study was to compare two bone augmentation techniques (Guided Bone Regeneration, GBR, with autogenous block graft and GBR with particulate autograft plus xenograft) in terms of efficacy, complications, operational parameters (cost of the materials used, time for patient preparation, time for surgery, fatigue of the physician caused by surgery) tolerability by the patient and patient comfort. 30 systemically healthy individuals with inadequate alveolar bone crest width who requested implant placement (15 Female and 15 Male) participated in this study. After an initial examination, 15 patients were assigned to GBR with block graft (GBR-BG) and 15 were assigned to GBR particulate autograft plus xenograft (GBR-AX). Bone thickness was recorded before surgery and at a post-operative 6th month. Complications as Bleeding, Hematoma, Flap dehiscence, Infection, Numbness were evaluated. Patients were requested to record pain and swelling via visual analog scale (VAS) at 3rd, 7th and 14th days after surgery. The swelling was also recorded by an experienced clinician at 3rd, 7th and 14th days after surgery. Cost, time for patient preparation, time for surgery, fatigue of the physician caused by surgery were also determined.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Surgery

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

CASE_CONTROL

Study Time Perspective

PROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Guided Bone Regeneration with Particulate graft

patients who had inadequate alveolar crest (crest width \<4mm) and requested of dental implant placement, treated with guided bone regeration with particulate graft

No interventions assigned to this group

Guided Bone Regeneration with block graft

patients who had inadequate alveolar crest (crest width \<4mm) and requested of dental implant placement, treated with guided bone regeration with block graft

No interventions assigned to this group

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* 30 to 62 years of age
* systemically health
* no smoking
* no use of medications for previous 6 months
* no pregnancy and lactation
* no contraindications for periodontal surgery.

Exclusion Criteria

* \<30 and \>62 years of age
* patients with systemic disease
* smoking habit ( current or past)
* any medication
* acute illness
* pregnancy or lactation

Minimum Eligible Age

30 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

62 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes