Skip to content

Guided Pterygoid Implant

Comparing Accuracy of Pterygoid Implants Placement Using Computer-guided Surgical Templates Versus Free Hand Technique

Status
Not yet recruiting
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07016828
Enrollment
12
Registered
2025-06-12
Start date
2025-07-30
Completion date
2026-06-30
Last updated
2025-06-12

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

Conditions

Atrophy of the Posterior Maxilla

Keywords

guided surgery, pterygoid implant, atrophic maxilla

Brief summary

Introduction & Background Alveolar ridge resorption after tooth extraction leads to significant bone loss, complicating prosthetic rehabilitation. Traditional bone grafting methods, though effective, involve long healing times and risks. Pterygoid implants offer a graft-free alternative by engaging dense bone structures like the pterygoid process. However, their placement is technically challenging due to limited visibility and proximity to critical structures. Computer-guided surgery may improve accuracy and reduce complications compared to freehand techniques. Research Question Does computer-guided surgery enhance the accuracy of pterygoid implant placement in atrophic maxillae compared to freehand techniques? Aim To compare the accuracy of computer-generated 3D surgical guides versus freehand placement of pterygoid implants. Hypothesis * H0: No difference in accuracy between techniques. * Hₐ: there is difference between two techniques Study Design A prospective randomized controlled trial (1:1 allocation) with 12 implants (6 per group(. Patient Selection Inclusion Criteria: Severe posterior maxillary atrophy (Cawood & Howell V-VI), residual bone height \<4mm, age 21-75. Exclusion Criteria: Contraindications for surgery, uncontrolled systemic diseases, or acute sinus infections. Methods * Group A: Implants placed using CBCT-based 3D surgical guides. * Group B: Freehand placement based on anatomical landmarks. * Primary Outcome: Implant position accuracy (postoperative CBCT vs. virtual plan(. * Secondary Outcomes: Surgical time, complications, and stability. Surgical Procedure * Osteotomy: Angled drilling (45-60°) into the pterygoid process. * Implant Placement: Torque ≥30 Ncm for primary stability. * Postoperative Care: Antibiotics, analgesics, and follow-up CBCT at one week. Statistical Analysis Data analyzed using SPSS, with G\*Power determining sample size (85% power, α = 0.05(. Ethical Considerations Approved by institutional review boards, with informed consent and confidentiality maintained.

Interventions

DEVICEguided surgery technique

* Clinical examination will be performed and preoperative CBCT will be taken for all the patients prior to the surgery to evaluate the posterior maxilla for the placement of the pterygoid implants. * Ideal pterygoid implant placement will be planned using the BlueSky Bio software (USA) which will be mostly to emerge from the third molar position and to engage the dense pillar of bone formed by the pyramidal process and pterygoid process of sphenoid bone. * surgical guide will be fabricated which will be either soft tissue without flap elevation.

the surgery will be done without the use of the surgical guides depending on the anatomical landmarks.

Sponsors

Fayoum University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
21 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. Patients with severe posterior maxillary atrophy (Class V-VI Cawood & Howell classification) requiring pterygoid implant placement. 2. Patients with severe alveolar bone atrophy in posterior maxilla (Residual alveolar bone height \<4mm in posterior maxilla precluding conventional implant placement). 3. Adequate interarch space ≥7mm for prosthetic rehabilitation. 4. Presence of pneumatized maxillary sinus with insufficient bone for sinus augmentation. 5. Patients aged 21-75 years with completed craniofacial growth.

Exclusion criteria

1. Patients with systemic conditions contra-indicating general anesthesia. 2. Patients with conditions contraindicating implant placement (e.g.: radiation to the head and neck, intra-venous bisphosphonates, uncontrolled Diabetes mellitus). 3. Patients with acute maxillary sinus infection or maxillary sinus cyst. 4. Restricted mouth opening (less than 3cm inter-arch distance anteriorly).

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Accuracy of implant positionthe patient will make postoperative CBCT after one week of the surgery to compare it with the preoperative virtual planning done on the preoperative CBCT.The primary outcome will be measured by comparing the position of implant in the virtual plan with that in the postoperative implant or the actual implant and this will be done by making a superimposition of the virtual plan with the postoperative CBCT then putting points on the coronal and apical parts of implants and then start to measure the following data: 1. direct linear measurements between the coronal and apical points of the virtual and actual implants (measured in millimeters) 2. angular deviations between the long axis of virtual and postoperative or actual implants.(measured in degrees) 3. indirect measurements of the coronal and apical points of virtual and actual implants to 3d planes.(measured in mm) All of this will be done for both groups.

Countries

Egypt

Contacts

Primary Contactnorhan magdy yousef, BDs
nm2650@fayoum.edu.eg+201067534200
Backup Contactal shimaa ahmed shaban, professor
aas16@fayoum.edu.eg+201006047940

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026