Faculty of oral and dental medicine, Cairo university
Cairo, Cairo Governorate, 4240310, Egypt
Location status: Recruiting
NCT Number: NCT06315413
The aim of the current study is to compare the effect socket sealing with flowable resin composite compared to dense polytetrafluoroethylene membrane after filling the extraction site with xenograft particles in terms of soft and hard tissue changes, procedural time, post operative pain, patients' satisfaction, and cost effectiveness.
Interested in participating?
Request Info20 year–70 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Cairo, Cairo Governorate, 4240310, Egypt
Location status: Recruiting
Implant placement has become the gold standard for replacing missing teeth. One of the biggest challenges present when placing implants is the lack of sufficient bone dimensions. This deficiency may be a common finding due to the process of post extraction remodeling where both bone height and width are reduced, complicating implant placement. As a result, several procedures have been suggested to address this issue. Socket preservation is one of the most implemented procedures used today to limit the amount of bone lost during post extraction remodeling. The current study was designed to compare the effectiveness of using flowable composite resin for socket sealing as an alternative to using d-PTFE membranes, bypassing the added time, cost and trauma needed for tunnel preparation and membrane tucking.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Extraction of hopeless teeth will be followed by grafting the socket with xenograft and coverage with injected flowable composite plug which will then be stabilized using 5.0 polypropylene suture material with a figure of eight suture.
Extraction of hopeless teeth will be followed by grafting the socket with xenograft and coverage with d-PTFE membrane which will the be left exposed intentionally. This will be followed by securing the membrane using 5.0 polypropylene suture material with a figure of eight suture.
Time frame: 4 Months
Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) (Millimeters)
Time frame: 4 Months
Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) (Millimeters)
Time frame: 4 Months
Millimeters
Time frame: During surgery
Stopwatch
Time frame: 1 week
Visual analogue scale (Santos, Botelho et al. 2021) (0-10) 0=No discomfort 10=Worst discomfort
Time frame: 2 weeks
Three questions questionnaire (Kiyak, Hohl et al. 1984). 7-point response scale:
7= very likely (or very satisfied), 1= not at all likely (or not at all satisfied)
Time frame: 4 Months
Checklist
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
Cairo University
Other
Evaluation of Socket Seal Using Flowable Composite Above Xenograft Compared to Dense Polytetrafluoroethylene (d-PTFE) Membrane in Ridge Preservation Procedures: a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT07718932
Alveolar Bone Loss, Bone Diseases
Thessaloniki, Greece
View Trial DetailsNCT07669792
Alveolar Bone Loss, Bone Diseases
Cairo, Egypt
View Trial DetailsNCT07433322
Alveolar Bone Loss, Bone Diseases
Richmond, Virginia, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT07638319
Alveolar Bone Grafting, Alveolar Bone Loss
Caparica, Monte Da Caparica, Portugal
View Trial Details