Clinical efficiency of lingual arch space maintainer

Comparison of clinical effectiveness of functional lingual arch as a space maintainer with the conventional lingual arch - A randomised clinical trial

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Phase 3

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2022/03/041306

Enrollment

Registered

2022-03-23

Start date

Unknown

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2022-04-04

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

Conditions

Health Condition 1: K006- Disturbances in tooth eruption

Interventions

Intervention1: Functional lingual arch: Lingual arch space maintainer with tooth attached. Control Intervention1: Conventional lingual arch: Lingual arch space maintainer without artificial pontic or

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Clinical criteria: 1)Patients aged 7-10 years 2)Unilateral and/or bilateral premature loss of missing mandibular molars. 3)Extraction site with no space loss 4)Positive and definitely positive children with compliant parents. Radiological criteria: 1)Presence of succedaneous tooth bud 2)Presence of more than 1mm bone overlying the succedaneous tooth germ.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1)Extraction site with space loss 2)Carious abutment teeth 3)Differently abled children

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Amount of space available (mesiodistal width in mm of missing space) Timepoint: 0,1month,3months,6months,12months	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Gingival healthTimepoint: 0,1 month,3months,6months,12months;Supraeruption of antagonist toothTimepoint: 0,1month,3months,6months,12months	—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr G Deepa

Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals

deepag@saveetha.com9994619386

Outcome results

None listed

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