Evaluation of Dental Implants After Using Several Bone Splitting Techniques
- Conditions
- Jaw, Edentulous
- Interventions
- Procedure: OsseodensificationProcedure: Magnetic malletProcedure: Piezo-surgery
- Registration Number
- NCT05720143
- Lead Sponsor
- Damascus University
- Brief Summary
In both full and partial tooth loss, the usage of dental implants for an artificial replacement for missing teeth is a well-known and reasonable treatment modality that leads to high patient satisfaction and enhanced life quality. (1) In both full and partial tooth loss, the usage of dental implants for an artificial replacement for missing teeth is a well-known and reasonable treatment modality that leads to high patient satisfaction and enhanced life quality Because there is insufficient bone volume to support the dimensions of the implants, the horizontal deficiencies of the alveolar ridge obstruct implant-supported rehabilitation, which has an impact on the ultimate prosthetic outcome from both a functional and cosmetic standpoint (2).
The split crest technique reduces treatment time, the number of surgical procedures required, and even the risk of complications for the patients, making it more readily accepted by them. It also allows dental implants to be installed in the same surgical procedure and does not require a donor area to remove the graft. (3) In this study, patients underwent rehabilitation of posterior missing teeth in the narrow mandibular ridge by dental implant after ridge splitting by osseodensification, piezosurgery, or magnetic mallet.
- Detailed Description
The study's objective is to compare ridge width gain after osseodensification, piezosurgery, or magnetic mallet after ridge splitting with simultaneous implant implantation in individuals with narrow alveolar ridges.
36 patients will be randomly allocated into three groups. Ridge splitting followed by piezo and bone expander will be performed with simultaneous implant placement in group 1.
osseodensification bure will be performed after ridge splitting with simultaneous implant placement in group 2.
magnetic mallet will be performed after ridge splitting with simultaneous implant placement in group 3.
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- RECRUITING
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 36
- Patients who can to follow-up appointments.
- Alveolar ridge width of at least 3 mm with sufficient height to place a regular implant.
- Availability of spongy bone with at least 1 mm in width between the cortical plates.
- Free of any underlying conditions that can impact bone metabolism.
- The presence of severe concavity on the vestibular or palatal side of the alveolar ridge.
- Patients with uncontrolled periodontal diseases.
- Patients who have undergone radiotherapy in the head and neck area.
- Smokers or patients with parafunction habits.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description Osseodensification group: Osseodensification Ridge splitting by piezosurgery and osseodensification bur Magnetic mallet group: Magnetic mallet Ridge splitting by piezosurgery and chisels by magnetic mallet Piezo-surgery group Piezo-surgery Ridge splitting by inserts of piezosurgery and bone expander
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method The crestal bone loss (Time Frame: Baseline, immediately after surgery, after 4 months of surgery, and after 6 months of functional loading.) The change in bone width radiographically after ridge splitting. The radiographic measurement by using cone beam computed tomography.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Implant stability quotients (Time Frame: at the time of surgery and 4 months after surgery) The score on a scale represents the degree of osseointegration and stability in dental implants by using MEGA Implant Stability Quotient. The scale ranges from 1 to 100, which indicates higher values meaning more excellent stability.
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
University of Damascus
🇸🇾Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic