Skip to content

Comparing two types of membranes with blood concentrate to heal gum bone loss around teeth

Pericardium membrane v/s collagen membrane with PRF in the treatment of furcation defects ? a clinico -radiographic study - Nil

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2025/08/093259
Enrollment
10
Registered
2025-08-19
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-09-15

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

Conditions

Health Condition 1: K056- Periodontal disease, unspecified

Interventions

Intervention1: Treatment of furcation defects: Two treatment options used for the resolution of furcation defects. One group treated with pericardium membrane and prf and other group treated with coll

Sponsors

Dr Sruthy Sudir
Lead Sponsor
Dr Sruthy Sudir
Collaborator

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Presence of minimum of 16 permanent teeth and more than or equal to 4 molars. Maxillary and mandibular molars with the presence Grade II furcation involvement as detected on radiography

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patients with any systemic disease or currently under any medical treatment. Pregnancy or lactation. Third molars, lingual furcation sites of mandibular molars, bone loss extending to the apex. Endodontically and non-endodontically treated teeth with periapical radiolucency, teeth with vertical fractures or cracks, mobility. Smokers, people using other forms of smoking along with cigarettes. Patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. Teeth intended for extraction. Teeth with metallic crowns.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Change in clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing pocket depth (PPD) at the furcation site from baseline to the endpoint (e.g., 6 or 9 months), measured clinically and confirmed radiographically.Timepoint: Change in clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing pocket depth (PPD) at the furcation site from baseline to the endpoint (e.g., 6 or 9 months), measured clinically and confirmed radiographically.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Radiographic bone fill (%) at T1/T2/T3 (standardized periapical/CBCT measurements). Vertical and horizontal defect depth reduction (mm) on radiograph. Furcation grade conversion (e.g., Miller/Goldman classification improvement). Tooth mobility change (Miller index). Gingival recession (mm) at treated sites. Plaque Index & Gingival Index changes. Patient-reported outcomes: post-op pain (VAS 0?10), discomfort, and satisfaction. Wound/healing index & soft-tissue complications (dehiscence, membrane exposure, infection). Need for re-intervention or adverse events related to procedure/materials.Timepoint: Change in clinical attachment level (CAL) and probing pocket depth (PPD) at the furcation site from baseline to the endpoint (e.g., 6 or 9 months), measured clinically and confirmed radiographically.

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Sanjeela Guru

Vydehi Institute of Dental Sciences and Research Centre

sanjeelaguru@yahoo.com7259665551

Outcome results

None listed

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