Ascending Ramus Versus Chin Cortical Plates for Reconstruction of Atrophic Maxilla

Atrophy of Edentulous Maxillary Alveolar Ridge Clinical Trial

Official title:

Assessment of Mandibular Ascending Ramus Cortical Plates for Reconstruction of Atrophic Maxillary Ridges Versus Chin Cortical Plates(Randomized Clinical Tial)

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03629860
• Other study ID #: Ahmed yousri
• Status: Recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: May 1, 2018
• Est. completion date: April 9, 2019

Study information

• Verified date: August 2018
• Source: Cairo University
• Contact: Ahmed Y Zayed, BSD
• Phone: 00201111634311
• Email: ahmed.zayed[@]dentistry.cu.edu.eg
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

Assessment of ascending ramus cortical plate for reconstruction of atrophic maxillary ridges versus chin cortical plates (Randomized clinical trial)

Description:

Assessment of ascending ramus cortical plate for reconstruction of atrophic maxillary ridges versus chin cortical plates (Randomized clinical trial) To know what is better and more efficient chin or ascending ramus cortical plates.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Recruiting
• Enrollment: 12
• Est. completion date: April 9, 2019
• Est. primary completion date: February 8, 2019
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: All
• Age group: N/A and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients with atrophic maxilla with residual bone height from 3 to 4mm.

• Both sexes

Exclusion Criteria:

• Intraoral soft and hard tissue pathology.

• Systemic condition that contraindicate implant basement.

• Psychiatric problems

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Atrophy
• Atrophy of Edentulous Maxillary Alveolar Ridge

Intervention

Procedure:
• Atrophic maxillary alveolar ridge augmentation
Autogenous bone blocks from chin and ascending ramus are obtained and used for reconstruction of atrophic maxillary ridges

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Egypt	Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University	Cairo	Al-Manial

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Cairo University

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Egypt, 

References & Publications (10)

Ali SA, Karthigeyan S, Deivanai M, Kumar A. Implant rehabilitation for atrophic maxilla: a review. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2014 Sep;14(3):196-207. doi: 10.1007/s13191-014-0360-4. Epub 2014 Apr 22. Review. — View Citation

Bellini CM, Romeo D, Galbusera F, Agliardi E, Pietrabissa R, Zampelis A, Francetti L. A finite element analysis of tilted versus nontilted implant configurations in the edentulous maxilla. Int J Prosthodont. 2009 Mar-Apr;22(2):155-7. — View Citation

Bidra AS, Almas K. Mini implants for definitive prosthodontic treatment: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2013 Mar;109(3):156-64. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60035-9. Review. — View Citation

Chiriac G, Herten M, Schwarz F, Rothamel D, Becker J. Autogenous bone chips: influence of a new piezoelectric device (Piezosurgery) on chip morphology, cell viability and differentiation. J Clin Periodontol. 2005 Sep;32(9):994-9. — View Citation

Dym H, Huang D, Stern A. Alveolar bone grafting and reconstruction procedures prior to implant placement. Dent Clin North Am. 2012 Jan;56(1):209-18, x. doi: 10.1016/j.cden.2011.09.005. — View Citation

Enneking WF, Eady JL, Burchardt H. Autogenous cortical bone grafts in the reconstruction of segmental skeletal defects. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1980 Oct;62(7):1039-58. — View Citation

Menini M, Signori A, Tealdo T, Bevilacqua M, Pera F, Ravera G, Pera P. Tilted implants in the immediate loading rehabilitation of the maxilla: a systematic review. J Dent Res. 2012 Sep;91(9):821-7. doi: 10.1177/0022034512455802. Epub 2012 Jul 31. Review. — View Citation

Peleg M, Mazor Z, Garg AK. Augmentation grafting of the maxillary sinus and simultaneous implant placement in patients with 3 to 5 mm of residual alveolar bone height. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999 Jul-Aug;14(4):549-56. — View Citation

Sorní M, Guarinós J, García O, Peñarrocha M. Implant rehabilitation of the atrophic upper jaw: a review of the literature since 1999. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2005 Apr 1;10 Suppl 1:E45-56. Review. English, Spanish. — View Citation

Topolovec-Vranic J, Canzian S, Innis J, Pollmann-Mudryj MA, McFarlan AW, Baker AJ. Patient satisfaction and documentation of pain assessments and management after implementing the adult nonverbal pain scale. Am J Crit Care. 2010 Jul;19(4):345-54; quiz 355. doi: 10.4037/ajcc2010247. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	width and height of the bone gained by the procedure and the new measures from a physiologic vital structures e.g( nasal floor, maxillary sinus or even occlusal plan)	new bone formation	6 months
Secondary	Histomorphometric analysis bone area percent	Nature and quality of new bone histology	6 months