ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
Post Extraction Changes Following Ridge Preservation Using Partially Demineralized Dentin Block Versus L- PRF Block
* The aim is to evaluate post extraction hard tissue changes following ridge preservation using partially demineralized dentin block versus L-PRF block in intact socket in the esthetic zone. * The main question: In patients with un restorable tooth, Will ridge preservation using partially demineralized dentin block be more effective than L-PRF block in managing the post extraction hard tissue alterations? * After enrolment, periodontal and radiographic examination and patients with badly un-restorative tooth in the esthetic zone will be identified. These patients will undergo to mesio-distal distance between adjacent teeth, corono-apical height of bone, presence of labial undercut, dehiscence, or fenestration and Relation to adjacent teeth measurements using trans gingival probing technique, and preapical radiograph or CBCT . * In both groups, the desired tooth will be extracted under local anesthesia using peritomies and surgical forceps. * In intervention group: the teeth will be cleaned and dried, and then the dentin will be ground to obtain particles of a certain size then partially demineralize dentin will obtained by using a tooth transformer machine. At the same time, blood samples are collected and processed to obtain fibrin membranes rich in platelets and leukocytes. This tissue is then mixed with partially demineralized dentin to create a solid mass called a "dentin block". During the process of preserving the alveolar bumps after extraction, this solid mass "dentin mass" is placed inside the dental pockets and covered with fibrin membranes rich in platelets and white blood cells, then resorbable material suture are used to fix the fibrin membranes and dentin mass in place. After the recovery period "6 months", a biopsy is taken for some cases from the site of the operation for histological evaluation during implant placement. * In control group: the same steps as the first group will be used, but by replacing the partially demineralized dental graft with
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
- Post Extraction Changes After Ridge Preservation Using Allogeneic Dentin Matrix Vs Demineralized Freeze Dried Allograft#874573
- Infiltration Anesthesia vs. Block Anesthesia#898584
- 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
- Evaluation of Bone Regeneration After Apical Surgery Using Advanced Platelet-rich Fibrin: Utilization of Ultrasound for the Assessment of Periapical Lesions#900020
- Leukocyte- and Platelet Rich Fibrin (L-PRF) Application in Impacted Mandibular Third Molar Removal Surgery#862676
Record · ID 847829
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