NCT07269990

Evaluation of Bone Behavior in Maxillary Post-extractive Sites Treated With Guided Bone Regeneration (G.B.R.) Techniques in Alveolar Socket Preservation (A.S.P.) Procedures With Different Autologous and Heterologous Biomaterials.

• Status: Active Not Recruiting
• Phase: Phase 1
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 30 (estimated)
• Sponsor: University of Foggia · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years – 90 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Accepted

Summary

The maxillary bone atrophies from traumatic, pathological events or related to physiological bone loss after tooth extraction, promoting a decrease in bone volume (vertical-horizontal) which has always been a crucial challenge for the clinician in order to obtain adequate rehabilitations prosthetics. The results of bone loss induced aesthetic and functional difficulties in achieving surgical and prosthetic rehabilitation of the right dental implant. Bone loss can be restored with autologous bone grafts and in large bone atrophy of the jaws require complex surgical techniques such as vascularized bone transplantation. As an alternative to the reconstruction of the maxillary tissue, several surgical techniques have been promoted to prevent or minimize bone resorption through market biomaterials with or without the patient's autologous bone. To reduce or counteract biological bone resorption, surgeons have promoted alveolar cavity preservation procedures (ASP) with autologous or heterologous graft materials. Recently, several studies have been published to evaluate the use of demineralized dentin material derived from the extracted tooth to obtain new bone in the maxillary post-extraction site. The aim of the study is to compare different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of the alveolar socket preservation technique.

Conditions

• Extracting Own Teeth

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
PROCEDURE	compare different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP compare different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP Group 2	The aim is to compare different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP in Group 1
PROCEDURE	Comparison of different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP	The aim is to compare different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP in Group 2
BIOLOGICAL	Comparison different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP	The aim is to compare different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP in Group 3
PROCEDURE	The aim is to compare different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP	The aim is to compare different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP in Group 4
PROCEDURE	The aim is to compare different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP	The aim is to compare different types of biomaterials 4 months after application through the use of ASP in Group 5

Timeline

• Start date: 2023-07-03
• Primary completion: 2026-05-01
• Completion: 2026-05-01
• First posted: 2025-12-08
• Last updated: 2025-12-17

Locations

1 site across 1 country: Italy