Reconstruction of Atrophic Maxillary Ridges Using Mandibular Blocks With and Without Coverage Using Collagen Membrane
NCT ID: NCT04462575
Last Updated: 2024-07-11
Study Results
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.
COMPLETED
NA
30 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2021-04-15
2023-09-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Reconstruction of Deficient Maxillary Ridges Using Retromolar Blocks With and Without Collagen Membrane
NCT06900933
Radiographic and Histological Assessment of Autogenous Onlay Block Versus Cortical Shell on Anterior Maxilla
NCT06450535
Reconstruction of Deficient Atrophic Ridges Using Guide Bone Regeneration Technique
NCT06746935
Guided Bone Regeneration in Atrophic Anterior Maxillary Ridges
NCT03731416
Ridge Augmentation in Posterior Mandible Using Tunneling Technique With Amix of Autogenous Bone and Xenograft With and Without Collagen Membrane
NCT03712631
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Onlay bone block covered using collagen membrane
The onlay bone block (harvested from mandibular intra oral sites) on top of a mixture of particulate autogenous bone and particulate xenogenic bone (assembly going to be fixed by at least 2 micro screws of diameter 1.5 mms and length 13 mms, to avoid micro movements of onlay bone block) covered by collagen membrane, stabilized by resorbable suture and fixed by tacs.
Onlay bone block covered using collagen membrane
The ratio is 40% of xenogenic bone particles (low resorption rate) to 60% of autogenous bone particles (contains viable cells) to be placed in recipient decorticated site and covered by onlay bone block..
Onlay bone block without collagen membrane
The onlay bone block (harvested from mandibular intra oral sites) on top of a mixture of particulate autogenous bone and particulate xenogenic bone (assembly going to be fixed by at least 2 micro screws of diameter 1.5 mms and length 13 mms, to avoid micro movements of onlay bone block).
Onlay bone block without collagen membrane
Onlay bone block without collagen membrane
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Onlay bone block covered using collagen membrane
The ratio is 40% of xenogenic bone particles (low resorption rate) to 60% of autogenous bone particles (contains viable cells) to be placed in recipient decorticated site and covered by onlay bone block..
Onlay bone block without collagen membrane
Onlay bone block without collagen membrane
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Alveolar bone width from less than or equal 5 mm.
* Both sexes.
* At least missing single tooth.
* Previous Failed Implants.
* Previous Failed Grafting.
Exclusion Criteria
* Patients with alcohol abuse
* Patients with narcotic abuse.
* Patients with bone disease that may affect normal healing, example; hyperparathyroidism.
* Patients had radiotherapy and chemotherapy in head and neck.
* Patients had neoplasms in sites to be grafted. 18
* Patients with Metabolic diseases uncontrolled diabetic patients, Glycated hemoglobin (Hb A1c) more than 7 mg\\dl.
* Pregnant females.
* Patients with Para functional habits, apprehensive and non-cooperative.
* Bone pathology related to the site to be grafted.
* Psychological problems, stress situation (socially or professionally), emotional instability, and unrealistic patients' expectations.
* Intraoral soft and hard tissue pathology.
* Systemic condition that contraindicate implant placement.
* Under the age of 18 years.
18 Years
46 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Cairo University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Mohannad Ahmed Ismail
Principal Investigator
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Faculty of Dentistry Cairo University
Cairo, , Egypt
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Hammerle CH, Jung RE. Bone augmentation by means of barrier membranes. Periodontol 2000. 2003;33:36-53. doi: 10.1046/j.0906-6713.2003.03304.x. No abstract available.
Cash and Alex: 20 years of guided bone regeneration in implant dentistry, 2nd ed. (2009).
Urban IA, Nagursky H, Lozada JL. Horizontal ridge augmentation with a resorbable membrane and particulated autogenous bone with or without anorganic bovine bone-derived mineral: a prospective case series in 22 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011 Mar-Apr;26(2):404-14.
Urban IA, Nagursky H, Lozada JL, Nagy K. Horizontal ridge augmentation with a collagen membrane and a combination of particulated autogenous bone and anorganic bovine bone-derived mineral: a prospective case series in 25 patients. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2013 May-Jun;33(3):299-307. doi: 10.11607/prd.1407.
Pellegrino G, Lizio G, Corinaldesi G, Marchetti C. Titanium Mesh Technique in Rehabilitation of Totally Edentulous Atrophic Maxillae: A Retrospective Case Series. J Periodontol. 2016 May;87(5):519-28. doi: 10.1902/jop.2016.150432. Epub 2016 Jan 12.
Polis-Yanes C, Cadenas-Sebastian C, Gual-Vaques P, Ayuso-Montero R, Mari-Roig A, Lopez-Lopez J. Guided Bone Regeneration of an Atrophic Maxilla Using Heterologous Cortical Lamina. Case Rep Dent. 2019 Jun 11;2019:5216362. doi: 10.1155/2019/5216362. eCollection 2019.
Jensen J, Sindet-Pedersen S. Autogenous mandibular bone grafts and osseointegrated implants for reconstruction of the severely atrophied maxilla: a preliminary report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1991 Dec;49(12):1277-87. doi: 10.1016/0278-2391(91)90303-4.
Misch CM. Comparison of intraoral donor sites for onlay grafting prior to implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997 Nov-Dec;12(6):767-76.
Montazem A, Valauri DV, St-Hilaire H, Buchbinder D. The mandibular symphysis as a donor site in maxillofacial bone grafting: a quantitative anatomic study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000 Dec;58(12):1368-71. doi: 10.1053/joms.2000.18268.
Gungormus M, Yavuz MS. The ascending ramus of the mandible as a donor site in maxillofacial bone grafting. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002 Nov;60(11):1316-8. doi: 10.1053/joms.2002.35731.
Clavero J, Lundgren S. Ramus or chin grafts for maxillary sinus inlay and local onlay augmentation: comparison of donor site morbidity and complications. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2003;5(3):154-60. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2003.tb00197.x.
Pourabbas R, Nezafati S. Clinical results of localized alveolar ridge augmentation with bone grafts harvested from symphysis in comparison with ramus. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2007 Spring;1(1):7-12. doi: 10.5681/joddd.2007.002. Epub 2007 Jun 10.
Acocella A, Bertolai R, Colafranceschi M, Sacco R. Clinical, histological and histomorphometric evaluation of the healing of mandibular ramus bone block grafts for alveolar ridge augmentation before implant placement. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2010 Apr;38(3):222-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2009.07.004. Epub 2009 Aug 3.
Spin-Neto R, Landazuri Del Barrio RA, Pereira LA, Marcantonio RA, Marcantonio E, Marcantonio E Jr. Clinical similarities and histological diversity comparing fresh frozen onlay bone blocks allografts and autografts in human maxillary reconstruction. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2013 Aug;15(4):490-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00382.x. Epub 2011 Aug 11.
Acocella A, Bertolai R, Ellis E 3rd, Nissan J, Sacco R. Maxillary alveolar ridge reconstruction with monocortical fresh-frozen bone blocks: a clinical, histological and histomorphometric study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012 Sep;40(6):525-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2011.09.004. Epub 2011 Nov 9.
Dasmah A, Thor A, Ekestubbe A, Sennerby L, Rasmusson L. Particulate vs. block bone grafts: three-dimensional changes in graft volume after reconstruction of the atrophic maxilla, a 2-year radiographic follow-up. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012 Dec;40(8):654-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2011.10.032. Epub 2011 Dec 3.
AlGhamdi AS. Post-surgical complications of symphyseal block graft with and without soft tissue grafting. Saudi Med J. 2013 Jun;34(6):609-15.
Hernandez-Alfaro F, Sancho-Puchades M, Guijarro-Martinez R. Total reconstruction of the atrophic maxilla with intraoral bone grafts and biomaterials: a prospective clinical study with cone beam computed tomography validation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013 Jan-Feb;28(1):241-51. doi: 10.11607/jomi.2405.
Monje A, Monje F, Chan HL, Suarez F, Villanueva-Alcojol L, Garcia-Nogales A, Wang HL. Comparison of microstructures between block grafts from the mandibular ramus and calvarium for horizontal bone augmentation of the maxilla: a case series study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2013 Nov-Dec;33(6):e153-61. doi: 10.11607/prd.1664.
Aloy-Prosper A, Penarrocha-Oltra D, Penarrocha-Diago M, Penarrocha-Diago M. The outcome of intraoral onlay block bone grafts on alveolar ridge augmentations: a systematic review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2015 Mar 1;20(2):e251-8. doi: 10.4317/medoral.20194.
Reininger D, Cobo-Vazquez C, Monteserin-Matesanz M, Lopez-Quiles J. Complications in the use of the mandibular body, ramus and symphysis as donor sites in bone graft surgery. A systematic review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2016 Mar 1;21(2):e241-9. doi: 10.4317/medoral.20938.
Khoury F: Augmentation of severe bony defects with intraoral bone grafts: biological approach and long-term results J Oral Maxillo Fac Surg 2017Volume 46, Supplement 1, Pages 26-27.
Claudino M, Julio C L, Luis E M, Bernardo M, Fernando G, tomographic evaluation of atrophic maxilla rehabilitated with autogenous and xenogeneic block grafts. Journal of Research in Dentistry 2017, 4(4):112-117.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
OMFS - (3-3-14)
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.