Composite Plug vs d-PTFE Membrane in Socket Preservation

Cairo University (CU)

Status: Enrolling

Conditions: Alveolar Bone Loss

Treatments: Procedure: Socket preservation using xenograft and intentionally exposed d-PTFE; Procedure: Socket preservation using xenograft and composite plug

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT06315413

Composite plug vs d-PTFE

Details and patient eligibility

About

The aim of the current study is to compare the effect socket sealing with flowable resin composite compared to dense polytetrafluoroethylene membrane after filling the extraction site with xenograft particles in terms of soft and hard tissue changes, procedural time, post operative pain, patients' satisfaction, and cost effectiveness.

Full description

Implant placement has become the gold standard for replacing missing teeth. One of the biggest challenges present when placing implants is the lack of sufficient bone dimensions. This deficiency may be a common finding due to the process of post extraction remodeling where both bone height and width are reduced, complicating implant placement. As a result, several procedures have been suggested to address this issue. Socket preservation is one of the most implemented procedures used today to limit the amount of bone lost during post extraction remodeling. The current study was designed to compare the effectiveness of using flowable composite resin for socket sealing as an alternative to using d-PTFE membranes, bypassing the added time, cost and trauma needed for tunnel preparation and membrane tucking.

Enrollment: 20 estimated patients

Sex: All

Ages: 20 to 70 years old

Volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• Patients having single non-adjacent hopeless maxillary tooth in the esthetic zone that are indicated for extraction.
• Patients with healthy systemic condition.
• Patients aged from 20 to 70 years old.
• Good oral hygiene.
• Accepts 4 months follow-up period (cooperative patients).

Exclusion criteria

• Systemic diseases or medications that might affect bone metabolism, increase surgical risk or complicate post-operative healing.
• Previous bone augmentation to implant site.
• Untreated periodontal diseases.
• Para-functional habits such as bruxism and clenching.
• History of radiation therapy to the head and neck.
• Heavy smokers (≥ 10 cigarettes per day).
• Pregnant or lactating females.
• Alcoholism or drug abuse.
• Psychiatric problems.

Trial design

Primary purpose: Treatment

Allocation: Randomized

Interventional model: Parallel Assignment

Masking: Double Blind

---

20 participants in 2 patient groups

Composite plug

Experimental group

Description:

Tooth extraction will be done a-traumatically followed by socket curettage and cleaning followed by xenograft filling for the socket and coverage with injected flowable composite plug which will then be stabilized using 5.0 polypropylene suture material with a figure of eight suture.

Treatment:

Procedure: Socket preservation using xenograft and composite plug

Exposed d-PTFE

Active Comparator group

Description:

Tooth extraction will be done a-traumatically followed by socket curettage and cleaning followed by xenograft filling for the socket and coverage with d-PTFE membrane which will be left exposed intentionally and secured using 5.0 polypropylene suture material with a figure of eight suture.

Treatment:

Procedure: Socket preservation using xenograft and intentionally exposed d-PTFE