A study designed to compare if conventional vestibuloplasty is better to be done alone or in combination with PRF membrane to increase the ridge height and assess wound healing.

Residual alveolar ridge height and wound healing after conventional vestibuloplasty versus PRF membrane as an adjunct to conventional vestibuloplasty : A pilot comparative clinical study. - NIL

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Phase 3

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2024/12/078512

Enrollment

Registered

2024-12-24

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: K068- Other specified disorders of gingiva and edentulous alveolar ridge

Interventions

Intervention1: Conventional vestibuloplasty with PRF: A labial-based mucosal supraperiosteal flap was released from the underlying periosteum through a horizontal incision of the mucogingival border,

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Completely edentulous mandibular arch. Class III and class IV residual alveolar ridge height.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Systemic diseases, pregnancy and lactation. Smoking, use of tobacco in any form and recreational drug users.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
To evaluate the effectiveness of PRF membrane as an adjunct to conventional vestibuloplasty in increasing the residual alveolar ridge height.Timepoint: Baseline, 1 month, 3 months	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
To evaluate wound healing after conventional vestibuloplasty versus PRF membrane as an adjunct to conventional vestibuloplasty.Timepoint: Baseline, 1 week	—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Avinash BS

JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research

Dr.avinashbs@jssuni.edu.in9945047223

Outcome results

None listed

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