MedTrace Logo

Minimally Invasive Ridge Splitting Versus the Conventional Open Flap Technique

NCT06329362 · Status: RECRUITING · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 16

Last updated 2024-03-26

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

The goal of this clinical trial is to compare implant stability, and crestal bone loss, when using minimal invasive ridge splitting versus convenient open flap technique. The main question is Does Minimal Invasive Implant ridge splitting ("transmucosal" without flap) influence the implant stability and crystal bone loss, when compared with the conventional open flap techniques? Researchers will compare Group A: Minimal Invasive Implant ridge splitting and Group B: Triangular flap technique is used to see if there is significant difference between the two groups when measuring implant stability, and crestal bone density.

Conditions

  • Alveolar Bone Loss

Interventions

PROCEDURE

Minimally invasive implantation

Specially designed ridge splitting instrumentation by Champions Implant GmbH which is implant shaped expanders.

PROCEDURE

Open flap procedure for ridge expansion.

Mucoperiosteal elevation and ridge splitting using conventional ridge expanders.

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • The Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh

    lead OTHER

Principal Investigators

  • Emad Deif, Prof. · Head of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department - Faculty of Dentistry Cairo University

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2023-07-31
Primary Completion
2025-07-31
Completion
2025-07-31

Countries

  • Egypt
  • Germany

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT06329362 on ClinicalTrials.gov