Skip to content

To evaluate and compare the implant primary stability between Ridge Split technique and Osseodensification technique.

Comparative evaluation of primary stability of dental implants in Conventional Ridge Split technique and Osseodensification in narrow mandibular ridge. - NIL

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2024/11/076283
Enrollment
14
Registered
2024-11-05
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: K089- Disorder of teeth and supporting structures, unspecified

Interventions

Intervention1: Densah® Bur VT1525 2.0-mm (Versah): Group II: Comprising 7 implant sites, this group will undergo the osseodensification technique, followed by the subsequent placement of 2 implants ea

Sponsors

DR MEGHNA AGARWAL
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1 Dental Condition: The presence of good oral hygiene. 2 Patients with extended posterior edentulous mandibular areas, encompassing a minimum of two missing teeth ie 36/37 or 46/47 3 Patients willing to actively participate in the study. 4 Minimum bone height of 12mm measured from the crest of the ridge to the upper border of the inferior alveolar canal. 5 Minimum ridge thickness of 3mm, with measurements less than 5mm at the crestal region. 6 Implant sites in consideration included both compact bone and cancellous bone.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Uncontrolled systemic conditions. 2. Systemic disorders that could compromise osseointegration. 3. Use of medications, such as steroids, that could impact bone metabolism. 4 Smokers was excluded from the study.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
The primary outcome used in sample size calculation reveal a moderate yet statistically significant difference favoring Group II primary stability. This signifies that the osseodensification technique would led to superior outcomes compared to the ridge splitting technique.Timepoint: The outcome will be assessed/ estimated immediately after implant placement and prosthesis will be given after 3 months.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
The compelling evidence from this study would strongly support the superiority of the osseodensification technique. This preference is attributed to the techniques capacity to enhance bone density, thereby contributing to an overall improvement in implant primary stability.Timepoint: The outcome will be assessed/estimated immediately after implant placement & prosthesis will be given after 3 months.

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Meghna Agarwal

ACPM DENTAL COLLEGE, DHULE

girijadodamani9999@gmail.com7020966944

Outcome results

None listed

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