Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT03646734
NCT03646734
Completed
N/A

Guided Bone Regeneration With Particulate Versus Block Graft: Evaluation of the Two Techniques From the Point of View of the Physician and the Patient

TC Erciyes University0 sites30 target enrollmentJanuary 10, 2017
ConditionsSurgery

Overview

Phase
N/A
Intervention
Not specified
Conditions
Surgery
Sponsor
TC Erciyes University
Enrollment
30
Primary Endpoint
bone gain
Status
Completed
Last Updated
7 years ago

Overview

Brief Summary

The aim of present study was to compare two bone augmentation techniques (Guided Bone Regeneration, GBR, with autogenous block graft and GBR with particulate autograft plus xenograft) in terms of efficacy, complications, operational parameters (cost of the materials used, time for patient preparation, time for surgery, fatigue of the physician caused by surgery) tolerability by the patient and patient comfort.

Detailed Description

The aim of present study was to compare two bone augmentation techniques (Guided Bone Regeneration, GBR, with autogenous block graft and GBR with particulate autograft plus xenograft) in terms of efficacy, complications, operational parameters (cost of the materials used, time for patient preparation, time for surgery, fatigue of the physician caused by surgery) tolerability by the patient and patient comfort. 30 systemically healthy individuals with inadequate alveolar bone crest width who requested implant placement (15 Female and 15 Male) participated in this study. After an initial examination, 15 patients were assigned to GBR with block graft (GBR-BG) and 15 were assigned to GBR particulate autograft plus xenograft (GBR-AX). Bone thickness was recorded before surgery and at a post-operative 6th month. Complications as Bleeding, Hematoma, Flap dehiscence, Infection, Numbness were evaluated. Patients were requested to record pain and swelling via visual analog scale (VAS) at 3rd, 7th and 14th days after surgery. The swelling was also recorded by an experienced clinician at 3rd, 7th and 14th days after surgery. Cost, time for patient preparation, time for surgery, fatigue of the physician caused by surgery were also determined.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
January 10, 2017
End Date
April 10, 2018
Last Updated
7 years ago
Study Type
Observational
Sex
All

Investigators

Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Zekeriya Tasdemir

Principal investigator

TC Erciyes University

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • 30 to 62 years of age
  • systemically health
  • no smoking
  • no use of medications for previous 6 months
  • no pregnancy and lactation
  • no contraindications for periodontal surgery.

Exclusion Criteria

  • \<30 and \>62 years of age
  • patients with systemic disease
  • smoking habit ( current or past)
  • any medication
  • acute illness
  • pregnancy or lactation

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

bone gain

Time Frame: 6 month after surgery

Bone gain was calculated by cone beam computerized tomography

Secondary Outcomes

  • Pain(Post-operative pain was assessed at 3, 7, and 14 days.)

Similar Trials