Hydrodynamic Ultrasonic Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation Technique Versus Closed Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation.

NCT03837275 | Unknown DMC

• 1 other identifier: oral surgery 14285
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 24
• Locations: 0 countries
• Sites: N/A

Brief Summary

Placing implants in the posterior maxillary area has the drawback of working with scarce, poor quality bone in a significant percentage of cases. Numerous advanced surgical techniques have been developed to overcome the difficulties associated with these limitations. Subsequent to reports on the elevation of the maxillary sinus through the lateral approach, there were reports on the use of the crestal approach, which is less aggressive but requires a minimal amount of bone. Furthermore, it is more sensitive to operator technique, as the integrity of the sinus membrane is checked indirectly. The main advantage of this new technique, Intralift, is that it does not require a minimum amount of crestal bone (indeed, the smaller the width of the crestal bone, the better this technique is performed). The possibility of damage to the sinus membrane is minimised by using ultrasound based hydrodynamic pressure to lift it, while applying a very non-aggressive crestal approach. Conclusions: We believe that this technique is an advance in the search for less traumatic and aggressive techniques, which is the hallmark of current surgery.

Conditions

Dental Implant

Keywords

intralift; maxillery sinus lift; hydrodynamic ultrasonic

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• gained bone height

  measured in millimeters by cone beam computed tomography

  3 month

Study Arms (2)

humsfe

EXPERIMENTAL

Sinus Floor Elevation Between Hydrodynamic Ultrasonic Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation Technique (Intralift Technique)

Procedure: Sinus Floor Elevation Between Hydrodynamic Ultrasonic Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation Technique

closed sinus lift

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

transcrestal maxilllary sinus floor elevation

Procedure: closed maxillary sinus lift

Interventions

Sinus Floor Elevation Between Hydrodynamic Ultrasonic Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation Technique PROCEDURE

Sinus Floor Elevation Between Hydrodynamic Ultrasonic Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation Technique (Intralift Technique) and implant placement

Also known as: intralift technique

humsfe

closed maxillary sinus lift PROCEDURE

transdcrestal sinus lift and immediate implant placment

Also known as: transcrestal sinus lift

closed sinus lift

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 70 Years
• Gender Eligibility Details: patients are eligible for implant placement older than 18 years old
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may not qualify if:

• Cases for current study will be selected free from local pathosis. Patients will be free from any systemic disease that could affect their reparative power.

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Cairo University: lead

Related Publications (5)

• Velazquez-Cayon R, Romero-Ruiz MM, Torres-Lagares D, Perez-Dorao B, Wainwright M, Abalos-Labruzzi C, Gutierrez-Perez JL. Hydrodynamic ultrasonic maxillary sinus lift: review of a new technique and presentation of a clinical case. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012 Mar 1;17(2):e271-5. doi: 10.4317/medoral.17430.

  PMID: 22143696 BACKGROUND

• Barone A, Santini S, Sbordone L, Crespi R, Covani U. A clinical study of the outcomes and complications associated with maxillary sinus augmentation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006 Jan-Feb;21(1):81-5.

  PMID: 16519185 BACKGROUND

• Vercellotti T, Nevins ML, Kim DM, Nevins M, Wada K, Schenk RK, Fiorellini JP. Osseous response following resective therapy with piezosurgery. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2005 Dec;25(6):543-9.

  PMID: 16353529 BACKGROUND

• Chipaila N, Marini R, Sfasciotti GL, Cielo A, Bonanome L, Monaco A. Graftless sinus augmentation technique with contextual placement of implants: a case report. J Med Case Rep. 2014 Dec 17;8:437. doi: 10.1186/1752-1947-8-437.

  PMID: 25515949 BACKGROUND

• Llopet J, Montaudon M, Guillaud E, Ella B. Comparison of 2 crestal sinus floor lift techniques performed on human cadavers. Implant Dent. 2014 Oct;23(5):626-32. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000143.

  PMID: 25192160 BACKGROUND

Study Officials

• Mohamed S El Hadidy, phd

  Cairo University

  STUDY CHAIR

• Basma Ga Mousa, phd

  Cairo University

  STUDY CHAIR

• Alaa Sh Emara, phd

  Cairo University

  STUDY CHAIR

Central Study Contacts

Mostafa A El Masry, msc

CONTACT

00201221953838; mostafa.elmasry@hotmail.com

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: DOUBLE
• Who Masked: PARTICIPANT, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Masking Details: double ( participant- outcome assessor) single blinded
• Purpose: TREATMENT
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: teaching assistant

Model Details: it is randomized clinical trial.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: February 8, 2019
• First Posted: February 12, 2019
• Study Start: March 1, 2019
• Primary Completion: March 1, 2020
• Study Completion: December 1, 2020
• Last Updated: February 12, 2019

Record last verified: 2019-02