Evaluation of the Effect of Osseodensefication Technique Versus Conventional Implant Drilling Technique in Implant Supported Mandibular Overdenture
NCT ID: NCT06590753
Last Updated: 2024-09-19
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.
RECRUITING
NA
10 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2022-12-01
2025-01-01
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.
Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Implant Stability in Healed Maxillary Posterior Sites Comparing Osteotome, Osseodensification and Conventional Drilling Implant Placement Techniques
NCT06599112
Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Immediate Implant Placement Using Osseodensification Versus Traditional Drilling Protocol
NCT06307691
Peri-Implant Marginal Bone Loss And Implant Stability In Maxillary Implant Overdenture When Using Osseodensification Versus Conventional Drills: A Randomized Clinical Trial
NCT05559632
Effect of Two Different Digital Construction Techniques of Implant-assisted Overdentures
NCT06720389
Impact of Mandibular Overdenture Base Construction Techniques on Assessment of Occlusion
NCT06080815
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The use of implants to retain a mandibular over denture has been recommended as the first treatment choice for the edentulous mandible. From the available evidence; it shows that this treatment leads to a great improvement in both clinical function and patient's reported outcomes when compared to conventional complete dentures (2).
Clinical studies have reported that dental implants in the mandible have higher survival rates compared to those in the maxilla, having thinner cortical bone combined with thicker trabecular bone compared to the mandible (3). In contrast to the previous studies, additional studies in the posterior mandible showed high failure rates due to the poor bone quality as well as other additional factors (3-4).
The osseointegration process leads to new bone apposition on the implant surface and allows reaching the implant secondary stability that is the functional contact between living bone and titanium dental implant (4).
Primary implant stability is affected by both the quality and the quantity of bone of the osteotomy site. Hence, a precise evaluation of bone structure is essential before implant placement implant (5). The term bone quality depends on bone density, bone vascularity, bone metabolism and other factors that may affect implant outcome. Many authors describe bone density as being equivalent to bone quality. This includes physiological and structural parts and the degree of bone tissue mineralization (4-5).
2 Successful dental implant placement requires sufficient amount of bone thickness covering the implant so that primary stability is achieved, which is an important requirement for long term success of the implant (2, 6).
Primary implant stability is defined as the biomechanical stability upon implant insertion, being influenced by numerous factors, such as: bone quantity and quality, the geometric design of the implant, surgical technique, and insertion torque. From this stability, new bone develops around the surface of the implant, constituting a biological fixation named secondary implant stability (7, 8).
The longevity of any implant prosthesis depends on successful osseointegration and implant stability. Consistent osteotomies and densification are important to implant primary stability and to early loading (9, 10).
Unlike traditional bone drilling technologies, osseodensification does not excavate bone tissue. Rather, it preserves bone bulk, so bone tissue is simultaneously compacted and autografted in an outwardly expanding direction to form the osteotomy (11, 12). It creates a densified layer of surrounding bone through compaction autografting while simultaneously plastically expanding the bony ridge at the same time (13, 14,15).
The new burs allow bone preservation and condensation through compaction autografting during osteotomy preparation, increasing the peri-implant bone density (%BV), and the implant mechanical stability (16). .
Osseous densification was shown to increase the insertion and removal torques of the implants compared to standard drilling and extraction drilling. This demonstrates increased implant primary biomechanical stability (17).
3 Osseodensification had a direct impact on increasing the values of peak insertion torques of the implants compared to cutting drilling which indicates enhancement of initial stability of implant fixture (18).
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
One will be placed using the conventional drill method site preparation technique on one side of the mandible
osseodensification bur
osseodensification bur
osseodensification
One will be placed using osseodensification (no cutting) implant site preparation technique on the other side.
osseodensification bur
osseodensification bur
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
osseodensification bur
osseodensification bur
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Patient's age ranges from 55-65 years.
* All patients should be free from any systemic disease such as bone diseases or debilitating diseases.
* Patient's residual ridge should be covered with firm mucosa free from any signs of inflammation, ulceration, or flabby tissue.
* Patients should have good oral hygiene.
Exclusion Criteria
* Patient with parafunctional habits (bruxism, clenching)
* Patient with xerostomia or excessive salivation.
* Patient with TMJ disorder.
55 Years
65 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Badr University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Mai Ahmed Abdel Fatah
Dr.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Azhar university (Grils)
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.
1147620530
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.