AzTrials
AzTrials

Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor OverexpressionNCT02168322

Perforated Barrier Membranes Maintain Physiologic Gingival Crevicular Fluid Growth Factor Levels

A study testing collagen membrane in people with Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Overexpression and Membrane Alteration, run by Al-Azhar University at 1 site in Egypt.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Membrane modifecation: Guided tissue membrane perforations may serve as a more biologic scaffold that could allow for the free passage of biologic mediators from the periosteum and overlying gingival connective tissue into the periodontal defects. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 26 to 49 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
What is being tested?
collagen membrane
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
30 participants
Where
1 siteEgypt
Study dates
Oct 2013to Mar 2014
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 26 to 49 years
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult

Who may be able to join

  • no systemic diseases which could influence the outcome of the therapy;
  • good compliance with the plaque control instructions following initial therapy; 3) teeth involved were all vital with no mobility ;
  • 4) each subject contributed a single 2 or 3-wall intrabony interproximal defects around premolar or molar teeth without furcation involvement; 5) selected 2- or 3-wall intrabony defects (IBC) measured from the alveolar crest to the defect base in diagnostic periapical radiographs of≥ 3 mm 6) selected probing depth (PD) ≥ 6 mm and clinical attachment loss (CAL) ≥ 5 mm at the site of intraosseous defects four weeks following initial cause-related therapy; 6) availability for the follow-up and maintenance program; 7) absence of periodontal treatment during the previous year; 8) absence of systemic medications that could affect healing or antibiotic treatment during the previous 6 months; and 9) absence of occlusal interferences, open interproximal contacts (diastema, flaring or both).

Who cannot join

  • Pregnant females were excluded from participating in the study

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Egypt1 site
  • Ain Shams Universty

    Cairo, Nasr City, 1123

Other trials in Egypt

About this study

Official title: Perforated Barrier Membranes Maintain Physiologic Gingival Crevicular Fluid Growth Factor Levels During Treatment of Intrabony Defects: An In Vivo Proof-of-Principle Study

Membrane modifecation:

Guided tissue membrane perforations may serve as a more biologic scaffold that could allow for the free passage of biologic mediators from the periosteum and overlying gingival connective tissue into the periodontal defects.

Read more

Study hyposethis:

To test this hyposthesis, this study was designed to evaluate levels of vascular endothelial cell growth factors and platlet derived growth factors in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) during the early stages of healing for localized intrabony defects treated with modified perforated membranes (MPMs), occlusive membranes (OMs) as compared to open flap debridement control (OFD).

Methods: Thirty non-smoking patients with severe chronic periodontitis participated in this prospective, randomized and single blinded trial. Each patient contributed one interproximal defect that was randomly assigned to experimental modified perforated membrane group (10 sites), occlusive membrane group (10 sites) or open flap debridement control (10 sites). Plaque index, gingival index, probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL) and the intrabony depth of the defect (IBD) were measured at baseline for patients enrollment. Gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) samples were collected on day 1 and 3, 7, 14, 21, and 30 days after therapy. The primary outcome variable was the change in VEGF and PDGF-BB levels for sites treated by MPMs or OM compared to that of the OFD treated cases.

Read the detailed description

surgical procedures:

  • All surgeries were performed by the same operator (AYG).
  • The surgical treatment phase was initiated only if the subject had a full-mouth dental plaque score of less than one and site plaque score of 0.
  • Surgical procedures were accomplished as described in detail by Gamal and Iacono. 14 Under local anesthesia, a mucoperiosteal flap was elevated starting with an internal bevel incisions to the mucogingival junction to allow passive closure. Debridement of all inflammatory granulation tissue from the intrabony defect was performed by means of Gracey 7/8 metal curettes until a sound, healthy bone surface was obtained. At this time point, teeth were thoroughly root planed combining the use of metal curettes and power-driven instrumentation.
  • For MPM treated sites, collagen membrane perforations were prepared just before surgery using a custom made 1 mm diameter pin and 1mm perforated acrylic template with a coronal occlusive rim of about 3 mm . Inter-perforation spaces were determined to be not less than 2mm in order to avoid loss of membrane stiffness. Thereafter, collagen membranes were hydrated in sterile saline, trimmed according to the template prepared for each defect, and adapted over the defects in such a manner that the entire defect and ≥2 of the surrounding alveolar bone was completely covered to avoid membrane collapse within the defect. The membranes were extended supracrestally 1 mm below the CEJ to ensure optimum gingival CT involvement in supracrestal wound healing. Collagen membranes were simply adapted in place according to the surgical protocol of the manufacturer without suturing. The mucoperiosteal flap was coronally positioned covering the entire membrane and sutured with 5-0 non-resorbable suture .
  • No periodontal dressing was applied. OM and OFD sites were treated the same way except for using occlusive membranes or defect closure without using membranes. All patients received oral and written postoperative instructions.
  • Patients were prescribed amoxicillin (500 mg)‡ every 8 hours for 1 week. Subjects with allergies to amoxicillin and derivatives were prescribed Clindamycin (300 mg) every 8 hours.
  • Plaque control effort was supplemented by rinsing with chlorhexidine (0.12% chlorhexidine hydrochloride §) for one minute three times daily for 2 weeks. The patients were instructed to refrain from tooth brushing and interdental cleaning was avoided at the surgical areas during this time.
  • Sutures were removed 14 days postoperatively and recall appointments for observation of any adverse tissue reaction and oral hygiene reinforcement were scheduled every second week during the first 2 months after surgery.
  • One month after surgery, all patients were instructed to resume their normal mechanical oral hygiene measures, which consisted of brushing using a soft toothbrush with a roll-technique and flossing. Supportive periodontal maintenance including oral hygiene reinforcement and supragingival scaling was performed during each recall appointment.

Gingival Crevicular Fluid (GCF) Sampling:

To avoid irritation, samples were obtained 1 day following surgery and after individuals had fasted overnight and between 8:00AM and 10:00AM.

  • Using micropipettes (5 ul), GCF samples were collected 21 by a single examiner (MA) who was masked to the attribution of the sites to groups.
  • Following the isolation and drying of the selected site with cotton rolls, a fisher brand disposable micropipettes € was placed intrasulcularly at the mesiofacial line angle of the selected site to a maximum depth of 2 mm below the gingival margin. Micropipettes were left in place until 5 µl of fluid was collected.
  • GCF samples were collected at day 1, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 30 days after therapy and diluted in saline solution (50 µl) for evaluation of VEGF and PDGF-BB levels. Samples were labeled, carried in a dark container and kept at -26 C until used.
Being tested
collagen membrane
Keywords
growth factors, periodontal regeneration, modefied perforated membranes

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • collagen membraneDevice

    Also called guided tissue membranes, guided bone regeneration, occlusive membranes

    bovine collagen membrane used for selective tissue regeneration

  • collagen membraneDevice

    Also called guided tissue membranes, resorbable membranes, guided bone regeneration

    collagen bovine occlusive membrane for selective tissue regneration

Study groups in NCT02168322
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
collagen membranesExperimentalcollagen barrier that help in isolating unwanted tissues in periodontal regneration
Receives: Device: collagen membrane

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. platelet derived growth factor and endothelial cell growth factor levels in the gigival cervicular fluid during Treatment of Intrabony Defects: An in Vivo Proof-of-Principle Study

    membrane perforations could provide more physiologic growth factors concentrations in the defect area for their optimal effects. To test this assumption in a more controlled manner with a standard growth factors levels of open flap debridement treated sites, the objective of this study was to evaluate levels of platelet derived growth factors - BB (PDGF-BB) and vascular endothelial cell growth factor (VCGF) in GCF during the early stages of healing for sites treated with MPM or OM as compared with those sites treated with control OFD.

    Measured: 30 days

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. clinical corelation with the growth factors levels

    could this controled level of the growth factors acheived with perforated membrane has a clinical impact

    Measured: 30 days

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted20 Jun 2014 (estimated)
  2. Study startOct 2013
  3. Primary completionJan 2014
  4. Study completionMar 2014

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
Double blind
Who is masked
Participant, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
30 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT02168322
Sponsor's protocol ID
Al Azhar universty
Status last verified
May 2015
First submitted
7 Jun 2014
Last updated
7 May 2015
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes

Publications

  • Gamal AY, Iacono VJ. Enhancing guided tissue regeneration of periodontal defects by using a novel perforated barrier membrane. J Periodontol. 2013 Jul;84(7):905-13. doi: 10.1902/jop.2012.120301. Epub 2012 Sep 24.

    PubMed 23003916

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing collagen membrane in people with Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Overexpression and Membrane Alteration, run by Al-Azhar University at 1 site in Egypt.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 May 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Egypt. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

platelet derived growth factor and endothelial cell growth factor levels in the gigival cervicular fluid during Treatment of Intrabony Defects: An in Vivo Proof-of-Principle Study (time frame: 30 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02168322, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 7 May 2015.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in