View clinical trials related to Alveolar Bone Resorption.
Filter by:the goal of this clinical trial is to learn if the new osseo-densification technique works to provide enough bone width and quality prior to implant placement in the upper jaw the main question it aims to answer is: Is the use of osseo-densification protocol better than the standard alveolar ridge widening techniques; regarding efficiency and comfort in obtaining sufficient alveolar ridge width in horizontally atrophic alveolar ridges?
Minimally invasive procedures with the tunnel technique have been suggested to decrease patient post-operative discomfort and morbidity in oral bone regeneration. In the ridge augmentation tunnel technique, crestal incision and the release of the connective tissue are avoided in order to enhance the blood supply of the flap. This approach preserves the blood circulation and does not damage the periosteum The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical outcome of a minimally invasive technique for maxillofacial horizontal bone augmentation .
The aims of the study was to correlate the extent of the dimensional alveolar bone changes after tooth extraction and contextual guided bone regeneration with serum vit D levels in 14 patients. Moreover, at 4 months, a small bone sample was collected in order to correlate histological and immunohistochemical parameters of bone with vit D serum levels.
The aim of the study will be to evaluate maxillary anterior teeth replacement with immediate dental implant utilizing vestibular socket therapy versus ice cream cone technique both clinically and radiographically.
split-mouth RCT, 25 months follow up. GBR protocol with LPRF as grafting material in the test group and autogenous bone with DBBM as grafting material in the control group.
The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate the safety of placing TiO2 scaffolds in alveolar ridge and to evaluate if the scaffold material contributes to maintain the anatomy and the volume of the alveolar process after tooth extraction.
Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) is an invaluable and beneficial surgical technique adopted when there is the need to augment an alveolar atrophy. Strong clinical and histologic evidence exists on the effectiveness and predictability of GBR in bone augmentation of ridge deficiencies. On the other hand, it is well known that GBR remains a challenge as in the most extreme cases, it is considered a highly technique-sensitive surgical procedure. Whilst there are numerous reviews which report the average incidence of complications in GBR, there is still insufficient evidence and manuscripts reporting a direct correlation between a specific biomaterial (membrane or scaffold) and observed complications. Only one recent systematic review and meta-analysis focused on wound healing complications following GBR for ridge augmentation procedures. Authors explored the complication rate based on the membrane type and on the timing of the first sign of soft tissue complications following bone augmentation procedures. They reported a complication rate of 17% of the overall soft tissue complications, including membrane exposure, soft tissue dehiscence, and acute infection (abscess). This estimate is consistent with that reported (12%) in a more recent systematic appraisal of the evidence on all types of complications in GBR (3). However, when horizontal augmentation procedures were reviewed, a higher rate (21%) of complications was reported within the first 18 months of a GBR procedure. This estimate was inclusive of all possible biologic complications following GBR whilst the rate of membrane exposure was of 23%. Vertical bone augmentation represents one of the most challenging bone regenerative procedures in surgical dentistry. This is because of the inherent difficulties of the surgical procedure and the high risk of complications. The primary aim of this procedure is to recreate alveolar bone in a vertical direction (without the support of any pre-existing walls) and enable recreation of a more favourable anatomy for the restoration of the edentulous site. Evidence on a variety of treatment options has been produced over the last 15 years including distraction osteogenesis, onlay bone grafting, and vertical ridge augmentation (VRA). Systematic reviews evaluating the efficacy of different surgical procedures for VRA either in a staged or a simultaneous fashion, reported a range of vertical bone gain of 2-8 mm. This gain was gradually lost (1.27 to 2.0mm) between 1 to 7 years post-surgery and a wide range of complications (0- 45.5%) has been reported. The aim of this study is to assess and compare incidence of complications and percentage of vertical bone gain when using four different barrier membranes in combination with 50/50 autogenous and xenogenous bone material in VRA procedures. Secondary aims will be to evaluate and compare early and late soft tissue wound healing, gingival microvasculature and structure, patient reported outcomes and the prevalence of need for further bone augmentation and need for soft tissue grafting. Additionally, this study will also aim to assess and compare histomorphometry and histochemistry analyses of core biopsies obtained before implant placement between the four different barrier membranes.
Aim of the current randomized clinical trial is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of computer-guided ridge splitting approach assisted by artificial intelligence versus conventional approach combined with simultaneous implant Placement.
two groups of inserted implants: trans-gingival and under-bone level; difference in the marginal bone loss at six months from placement between the two groups of implant positioned in the posterior atrophic maxilla
Customized bone blocks need CBCT and digital software to design the block needed to rehabilitate. Some advantages are reduced surgical time and better adaptation of the graft, leading to less complications. Objectives: The primary aim of this study is to determine the bone regeneration capacity through a histological study and the bone volumetric changes of allograft bone blocks in the posterior site of the mandible. The secondary outcome will be to assess the survival and success rate of dental implants placed in the allograft regenerated area. Materials and Methods: After studying the CBCT to regenerate the posterior sites of the mandible, the investigators will design CAD/CAM freeze- dried bone allograft to fit exactly on the defect morphology that the patients present. A full thickness flap will be released to have a correct access of the defects. The sterile blocks have to fit perfectly on the defect and fixed by screws. Covered with resorbable membranes fixed with pines and suture. 4 months later, 2nd CBCTwill be performed. During the implant surgery, a bone trephine will be removed and sent into a Laboratory to make a histological study of the bone block for histomorphometry. After 3 months, second-stage surgery and healing caps will be placed if needed. Impressions will be taken 2 weeks after to perform the final crowns.