Skip to content

Comparative Study of Maxillary Bone Preservation after Dental Extraction with Different Biomaterials

Comparative Study of Alveolar Border Preservation after Exodontia with Different Biomaterials

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
REBEC
Registry ID
RBR-29nbjw
Enrollment
Unknown
Registered
2018-10-10
Start date
2014-08-30
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-10-27

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

Conditions

Study conducted in humans, who present teeth with periodontal disease

Interventions

Extraction of a tooth compromised by caries, fracture or periodontal disease. Two groups with a total of 20 participants, randomly divided, being a control group, with 10 individuals, performing the e
Procedure/surgery
D25.339.312

Sponsors

Universidade de Guarulhos
Lead Sponsor
Universidade de Guarulhos
Collaborator

Eligibility

Age
20 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Individuals who sought the specialization clinic in Implant Dentistry of the University of Guarulhos and had indication of previous exodontia to the installation of implants osseointegráveis, with more than 20 years; good general health, requiring extraction of a maximum of 2 contiguous teeth in the maxilla, the teeth being condemned for periodontal reasons, root fracture, caries and unsuccessful endodontic treatment.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Individuals under 20 years of age; smoking; people with diabetes; carriers of blood dyscrasias; patients who use anticoagulants; pregnant women; infants; patients who had dental elements with active infection.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
To evaluate the effect of socket preservation after extraction using human recombinant bone morphogenetic protein type 2 (rhBMP2) to fill the human dental socket using computed tomography two days after extraction (T0) and after four months (T1 ). For the evaluation of the preservation of the sockets, using the tomographic images, the following dimensions were obtained: height of the buccal wall (Height V), determined in mm; height of the palatal wall (Height P), determined in mm and socket area, determined in mm2, obtained through the profile of the socket (edge), being delineated using the cursor and through a software tool. The data of height of the buccal wall, height of the palatine wall and area of the socket ridges, in the different periods of the study, and intergroup, within the same experimental period, were evaluated. In addition, the intragroup variation in the time intervals (T1 - T0), for the three variables studied, expressing the relation of reduction in height of the buccal and palatal bone wall and area.;Regarding height of the vestibular wall, the control group had an initial mean T0 of 7.64 mm + - 2.09 mm and after four months a mean T1 of 4.26 mm + - 1.68 mm demonstrating loss in height with significant statistical difference. The test group presented a mean initial height T0 of the buccal wall of 7.54 mm + - 4.16 mm and after four months T1 6.93 mm + - 4.06 mm, showing no statistically significant difference. When comparing both groups within the same time interval, no statistically significant difference of the initial means T0 was observed. However at the T1 moment, after four months, a statistically significant difference could be observed with a mean of 4.26mm + - 1.68mm and 6.93mm + - 4.06mm for the control and test groups respectively. Regarding the height of the palatine wall, the test group also had a superior behavior, since the test group did not present a statistically significant difference between the T0 and T1 times, while the con

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Secondary outcomes are not expected.

Countries

Brazil

Contacts

Public ContactWalterson Prado

Universidade de Guarulhos

mathiasprado@uol.com.br+5511982598232

Outcome results

None listed

Source: REBEC (via WHO ICTRP)