Skip to main content
MedPath Trial logoMedPath TrialMedPath Trial Home
Clinical Trials/NCT03212820
NCT03212820UnknownNot Applicable

Clinical Evaluation of the Effect of Low Speed Drilling Versus Conventional Drilling Technique on Crestal Bone Level in Maxilla. A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Cairo University0 sites20 target enrollmentStarted: July 1, 2016Last updated:
Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to LinkedInShare to Reddit
Conditions
Interventions

Trial Snapshot

Phase
Not Applicable
Enrollment
20
Primary Endpoint
crestal bone loss
Study OverviewStudy DesignEligibility CriteriaArms & InterventionsOutcomesInvestigatorsRecords & IdentifiersSimilar Trials

Study Overview

Brief Summary

20 patients were selected requiring implant placement and divided randomly into two groups (10 in each group)

  • for the study group, starter drill is used to locate the point of insertion as planned then pilot drill is also used to the full desired working length after that all other sequential drills are used at a low speed (50-70 rpm) without irrigation .
  • In the study group: implant will be inserted in the low speed osteotomy site.
  • In the control group: implants will be inserted in the conventional prepared osteotomy site.
  • For both groups there is no surgical guide used.
  • The flap will then be copiously irrigated with saline in preparation for closure.
  • The flap will then be closed using interrupted 4/0 resorbable sutures.

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Parallel
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Masking
Single (Participant)

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
18 Years to — (Adult, Older Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Inclusion Criteria

  • •Patients restoring missing maxillary teeth with implant placement.
  • •Both sexes.
  • •Age: 25-45
  • •Mesio-distal dimensions: Not less than 6 mm
  • •Bone Height: Not less than 12 mm
  • •Bucco-lingual dimensions: Not less than 8mm
  • •All measures will be assessed using CBCT.

Exclusion Criteria

  • •Sites needing bone grafting or augmentation.
  • •Heavy smokers more than 20 cigarettes per day.
  • •Patients with systemic disease that may affect normal healing.

Arms & Interventions

conventional drilling

Active Comparator

drilling at conventional or high speed

Intervention: Drilling at conventional or high speed (Procedure)

Biologic drilling

Experimental

drilling at low speed

Intervention: Drilling at low speed (Procedure)

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

crestal bone loss

Time Frame: 6 month

measurement from radiographic analysis using digital periapical x-ray

Secondary Outcomes

  • Implant stability value(3 month)
  • patient morbidity after procedure(1 day)

Investigators

Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Ahmed Tarek

Principle investigator

Cairo University

Similar Trials

Unknown
Not Applicable
Low Speed Drilling Versus Conventional Drilling Technique on Crestal Bone Level in Maxilla.(Group A ) A Randomized Controlled Clinical TrialBone Resorption
NCT03220815Cairo University20
Unknown
Not Applicable
Low Speed Drilling Versus Conventional Drilling Technique on Crestal Bone Level in Maxilla.(Group C ) A Randomized Controlled Clinical TrialBone Resorption
NCT03220789Cairo University20
Completed
Not Applicable
In-patient Comparison of Immediately Loaded and Non-loaded Submerged and Transgingival Healed Implants Within 4 MonthsJaw, Edentulous
NCT06408506Medical University of Graz20
Unknown
Not Applicable
Different Surgical Drilling Protocols in Posterior MaxillaMissing Teeth
NCT06334081Mansoura University16
Completed
Not Applicable
Interchangeable Guide in Ridge Splitting Flapless Technique for Implant PlacementAnterior Maxillary Narrow Ridge
NCT04386382Hams Hamed Abdelrahman8