Comparison of Piezoelectric Split-crest Technique Versus Expansion Using Hand Driven Ridge Expanders in Treatment of Maxillary Narrow Ridges
1 other identifier
interventional
28
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Comparison of Piezoelectric split-crest technique versus expansion using Hand Driven Ridge Expanders in treatment of Maxillary Narrow Ridges
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at below P25 for not_applicable
Started May 2021
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
May 20, 2021
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
November 19, 2021
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
December 2, 2021
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
May 1, 2022
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
July 1, 2022
CompletedDecember 3, 2021
December 1, 2021
12 months
November 19, 2021
December 2, 2021
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
bone width
bone width gain in millimeters
5 months
Secondary Outcomes (1)
implant stability
5 months
Study Arms (2)
Piezoelectric split-crest technique in treatment of Maxillary Narrow Ridges
EXPERIMENTALPiezoelectric split-crest technique in treatment of Maxillary Narrow Ridges
Hand Driven Ridge Expanders in treatment of Maxillary Narrow Ridges
ACTIVE COMPARATORHand Driven Ridge Expanders in treatment of Maxillary Narrow Ridges
Interventions
Comparing Piezoelectric split-crest technique versus expansion using Hand Driven Ridge Expanders in treatment of Maxillary Narrow Ridges
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Participants are free from any systemic diseases.
- Participant have missing one or two premolars or molars with sufficient alveolar ridge height and insufficient alveolar ridge buccolingual (BL) width that interfere with conventional straight forward implant placement.
- The minimum BL ridge width included in the study will be 3.5 mm to facilitate ridge splitting and expansion
You may not qualify if:
- Patients with residual infections in the edentulous areas.
- Medically compromised groups.
- Smokers and patients with poor oral hygiene.
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Cairo University
Giza, Egypt
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- DOUBLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- assistant lecturer
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
November 19, 2021
First Posted
December 2, 2021
Study Start
May 20, 2021
Primary Completion
May 1, 2022
Study Completion
July 1, 2022
Last Updated
December 3, 2021
Record last verified: 2021-12