Tenting Abutment Technique Versus Screw"Tent-Pole" Technique for Augmentation of Posterior Atrophic Mandible
NCT ID: NCT06443476
Last Updated: 2024-06-05
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.
UNKNOWN
NA
16 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2023-10-01
2024-10-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The tent pole provides excellent mechanical properties; stability \& fixation, yet very poor features to preserve the integrity of the soft tissue.
Using the tenting abutment technique will help preserve the soft tissue and decrease the amount of dehiscence that might accompany the use of the tent pole.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Comparative Study Between Autogenous Bone Block and Tent Pole Technique for Augmentation of Atrophic Anterior Maxilla
NCT06125938
Evaluation of the Efficacy of Allograft Versus Tenting Technique in Open Sinus Lifting With Immediate Implant Placement
NCT06254378
Comparison of Autogenous Bone Graft and Screw Tent-Pole Technique on Atrophic Mandible
NCT04133090
Enhancement of Deficient Labial Bone Using Bone Ring Technique and Tent Pole Technique With Immediate Implant Placement
NCT07171476
Evaluation of "Tent-Pole" Grafting Technique for Reconstruction of Mandibular Ridge Vertical Defects
NCT04192851
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Xenograft bone has been utilized for the reconstruction of large 3-dimensional defects because it has no donor site morbidity and is of an unlimited volume in quantity.
Guided bone regeneration (GBR) describes the use of membranes to regenerate bony defects. A membrane for GBR needs to be biocompatible, cell occlusive, non-toxic, moldable and possess space-maintaining properties including stability.
* e. Explanation for choice of comparators (conventional titanium mesh): Tent pole offers superb mechanical properties for guided bone regeneration treatment in larger areas and it is regarded one of the most available covers for guided bone regeneration yet one of the cheapest.
B. Objectives:
* a. Aim of the study:
* To evaluate the quantity of gained bone under tenting abutment compared to a tent pole.
* To evaluate amount of wound dehiscence postoperatively using tenting abutment technique compared to a tent pole.
* ·To optimize the anatomical situation in order to facilitate implant installation.
7b. Hypothesis:
* Bone is a dynamic and living tissue with the capacity to repair and regenerate in response to injury. It is further possible to guide bone cells into an area that previously consisted of bony tissue to regenerate bone and increase the bone volume.
* Tenting abutment is suitable as a biomaterial for creating a space between the bone cortex and the periosteum to enhance new bone regeneration.
* Tenting abutment material will enhance the quantity and quality of newly formed bone.
* Tenting abutment will cause less soft tissue dehiscence and will dramatically decrease the percentage of the collapse of the space produced by the bone graft and minimizes resorption of the grafting material compared to the titanium mesh.
7c. Primary and secondary objectives:
1. Primary objective:
Evaluate bone gained (height and width) and the period of time of healing in the atrophic posterior mandible when using tenting abutment technique compared to tent pole.
2. Secondary objectives:
Evaluation of soft tissue dehiscence and resorption of the grafting material that might occur using tent pole compared to the tenting abutment.
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
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
conventional group
Using a tent pole to gain bone in the atrophic posterior mandible.
Tent pole technique
using the Tent pole technique to gain bone vertical and horizontal loss
study group
Using a Tenting abutment to gain bone in the atrophic posterior mandible
Tenting abutment technique
To evaluate a novel method using a designed tenting abutment to reduce number of surgeries and the edentulous healing period is shortened. In addition, to prevent vertical and horizontal collapse of the bone graft and minimizes resorption of the bone graft during the healing the atrophic posterior mandible.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Tenting abutment technique
To evaluate a novel method using a designed tenting abutment to reduce number of surgeries and the edentulous healing period is shortened. In addition, to prevent vertical and horizontal collapse of the bone graft and minimizes resorption of the bone graft during the healing the atrophic posterior mandible.
Tent pole technique
using the Tent pole technique to gain bone vertical and horizontal loss
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Both sexes.
* No intraoral soft and hard tissue pathology.
* No systemic condition that contraindicates implant placement
Exclusion Criteria
* Untreated gingivitis, periodontitis.
* Insufficient oral hygiene.
* Previous radiation therapy for the head and neck neoplasia, or bone augmentation to implant site..
Systemic criteria:
* Systemic disorders.
* Heavy smoking of more than 20 cigarettes per day.
* Bone pathology.
* ·Psychiatric problems. Emotional instability. Unrealistic aesthetic demands.
20 Years
65 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.
Alaa Mohmmed Salem Hafedh
PRINCIPLE INVESTIGATOR
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Mohamed ahmed Farid shehab, professor
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
supervisor
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Alaa Mohammed Hafedh
Cairo, , Egypt
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
OMFS (3-3-5)
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.