FindTrial
Sign In

Comparison of two grafts ,Platelet Rich Fibrin Plug Vs Biphasic Calcium Phosphate in the Treatment of Chronic Periodontitis Patients

Comparative Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Platelet Rich Fibrin Plug Vs Biphasic Calcium Phosphate (SybografTM - Plus) as Grafts in the Treatment of Infrabony Defects in Chronic Periodontitis Patients

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2018/01/011301
Enrollment
40
Registered
2018-01-12
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-02-03

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: null- Chronic Periodontitis patients with interproximal bone defects of 5 mm or more.

Interventions

Intervention1: Platelet rich fibrin plug: platelet rich fibrin plug obtained from the patients own blood. Control Intervention1: biphasic calcium phosphate graft: comercially available biphasic calciu

Sponsors

Parkavi A
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Age group between 20-60years 2. Diagnosis with chronic periodontitis 3. Patients in good systemic health with no contraindication to periodontal surgery 4. Patients having infrabony defects with pocket depths of 5mm or more and with radiographic evidence of vertical or angular bone loss in the affected sites. 5. Involved teeth to be vital and asymptomatic

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. One — wall osseous defects. 2. Patients suffering from any systemic diseases or with compromised immune system. 3. Patients who had received any type of periodontal therapy for the past 6 months 4. Patients taking any immuno-suppressive drugs like corticosteroids 5. Patients with a known history of allergy to doxycycline or Chlorhexidine or any other medicine be used in the study. 6. Patients showing unacceptable oral hygiene compliance during / after the phase I therapy. 7. Patients taking any drug known to cause gingival enlargement. 8. Pregnant and/or lactating mothers. 9. Patients who were smokers or had tobacco in any other form. 10. Endodontically treated teeth. 11. Patient on anticoagulant therapy 12. Patient with bleeding disorders.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
1. Plaque Index (P.I.) (TURSKEY-GILMORE-GLICKMAN MODIFICATION OF QUIGLEY HEIN). 2. Gingival Index (G.I.) (LOE &SILNESS, 1963). 3. Probing Pocket Depth (PPD). 4. Clinical Attachment Level (CAL). Timepoint: 1.Plaque Index (P.I.) (TURSKEY-GILMORE-GLICKMAN MODIFICATION OF QUIGLEY HEIN). 2. Gingival Index (G.I.) (LOE &SILNESS, 1963). Plaque and Gingival index will be measured at baseline, 1 month, 3 month and 6 month post-operatively. 3. Probing Pocket Depth (PPD). 4. Clinical Attachment Level (CAL). Probing Pocket Depth and Clinical Attachment Level will be measured at baseline, 3 month and 6 month post-operatively.—

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Radiographic bone fill will be evaluated using inta oral periapical radiographs of the surgical site.Timepoint: radiographs will be taken at baseline, immediately post surgery and at sixth month post surgery.—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactParkavi A

Nair Hospital Dental College

maladixit25@gmail.com9223340938

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026