ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
Histological Comparison of Ridge Preservation Using Mineralized FDBA Alone Versus a Combined Mineralized-Demineralized Freeze Dried Bone Allograft
This entire protocol involves procedures that are standard care. The purpose of the research is to evaluate whether there are any differences in new bone formation following tooth extraction and grafting of the extraction socket with either 100% mineralized FDBA (FDBA) or a combination of 70% mineralized \& 30% demineralized FDBA (DFDBA). Both FDBA and DFDBA are commonly used in dentistry for this purpose. Until recently, there has been no human evidence of differences in new bone formation with one material versus another. Recently, DFDBA has been shown to provide a greater percentage of vital bone formation than FDBA. No studies have been done on materials that provide a combination of demineralized and mineralized FDBA for ridge preservation. That is the purpose of this study. There will be two subject groups in this study. All subjects will require extraction of at least one non-molar tooth, followed by replacement of the missing teeth with dental implants. Each group will have 22 subjects. The primary distinction between groups will be the use of either a combination of 70% mineralized \& 30% demineralized FDBA or 100% mineralized FDBA: Group 1 will have 70% mineralized \& 30% demineralized FDBA grafted into the extraction socket for ridge preservation. Group 2 will have 100% mineralized FDBA grafted into the extraction socket for ridge preservation. The allocation of subjects into group 1 or 2 will based on numbers drawn from a stack of sealed envelopes. A small flap will be reflected to an extent about 3-4mm beyond the bony walls of the socket. A measuring stent will be placed and measurements of ridge width and ridge height will be taken and recorded to the nearest 0.5mm. Ridge width will be measured using a ridge caliper at a point approximately 4mm apical to the facial and lingual bony crest. Ridge height will also be measured. The tooth will be extracted and the subject will then be randomized by drawing a sealed envelope from the stack. Either 100% mine
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- To Compare Ridge Preservation Technique Using Leukocyte Platelet Rich Fibrin (L-PRF) and Freeze-dried Bone Allograft (FDBA) Layered Technique vs L-PRF/FDBA and L-PRF Alone in Influencing Quantity and Quality of New Bone Formation in Grafted Extraction Sockets#1093939
- Mineralized Dentin Graft Versus Beta-Tricalcium Phosphate for Alveolar Ridge Preservation#863243
- Histologic Evaluation of Healing Following Tooth Extraction With Ridge Preservation Using NuOss XC and NuOss Particulate#862211
- Modified Ridge Splitting Technique Using Autogenous Bone Blocks (MRS)#1086855
- Alveolar Ridge Preservation With Polycaprolactone Scaffold for Implant Site Development#871827
Record · ID 1395989
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive