Trials / Unknown
UnknownNCT04141215
Allogeneic Bone Paste Versus Allogeneic Bone Powder
Allogeneic Bone Paste Versus Allogeneic Bone Powder in Pre-implant Guided Bone Regeneration in Oral Surgery: a Randomized Non-inferiority Clinical Trial
- Status
- Unknown
- Phase
- N/A
- Study type
- Interventional
- Enrollment
- 86 (estimated)
- Sponsor
- Biobank · Industry
- Sex
- All
- Age
- 18 Years
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
Summary
Autogenous bone graft has been considered the gold standard in Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) technique used for bone augmentation. However, there are disadvantages associated with autograft use such as limited amount of available bone and increased morbidity for the patient at the sampling site. Several biomaterials have been used as a replacement of the autogenous bone. Viral-inactivated bone allograft powder is an alternative that has proven efficacy and tolerance. This study aims to assess the non-inferiority of viral-inactivated allogeneic bone paste compared to a viral-inactivated cortico-cancellous allogenic bone powder in achieving the ideal bone volume.
Conditions
Interventions
| Type | Name | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BIOLOGICAL | BIOBank bone paste | BIOBank bone paste (PPT322) |
| BIOLOGICAL | BIOBank cortico-cancellous bone powder | BIOBank cortico-cancellous bone powder (PPT6) |
Timeline
- Start date
- 2019-11-15
- Primary completion
- 2022-11-30
- Completion
- 2022-11-30
- First posted
- 2019-10-28
- Last updated
- 2022-03-02
Locations
1 site across 1 country: France
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT04141215. Inclusion in this directory is not an endorsement.