AzTrials
AzTrials

Alveolar Bone ResorptionNCT04830670

Bone Formation Maxillary Sinus Width

An observational study of Alveolar Bone Resorption, run by International Piezosurgery Academy at 3 sites in Italy.

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

According to previous scientific evidence lining on biological concept of bone regeneration into the maxillary sinus, an observational study was set up to record possible (hypothesized) difference in bone formation between different width of the maxillary sinus itself. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Alveolar Bone Resorption
What is being tested?
sinus floor elevation with lateral approach
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
How many people
16 participants
Where
3 sitesItaly
Study dates
15 Mar 2017to 15 Mar 2021
Phase
Observational
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 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Adult, Older adult

Study population: Any patient with Kennedy class II partial edentulism (Kennedy 1928) requiring unilateral sinus floor elevation for the placement of two not adjacent dental implants supporting a fixed partial prosthesis was eligible for entering this study

Who may be able to join

  • height of the residual bone crest <5 mm in both sites where implant placement was planned;
  • age >18 years;
  • written informed consent given.

Who cannot join

  • general contraindications to implant surgery
  • smokers
  • uncontrolled diabetes (HBA1c > 7.5%)
  • treated or under treatment with intravenous antiresorptive drugs
  • allergy to bovine collagen
  • immunosuppressed
Show all 14Show fewer
  • irradiated in the head and neck area
  • pregnant or breastfeeding
  • substance abusers
  • psychiatric problems or unrealistic expectations
  • patient not fully able to comply with the study protocol.
  • maxillary sinus conditions contraindicating sinus floor elevation
  • poor oral hygiene and motivation (FMPS >25 and or FMBS>20)
  • Schneiderian membrane perforation during surgery

Trial locations and contacts

3 sites in 1 country.

Italy3 sites
  • Hesire

    Cassano Allo Ionio, CS, 87011

  • Studio

    Gorizia, GO, 34170

  • Studio B

    Verona, VR, 37045

Other trials in Italy

About this study

Official title: Comparison of Bone Formation According to Different Maxillary Sinus Width: a Multicenter Prospective Study.

According to previous scientific evidence lining on biological concept of bone regeneration into the maxillary sinus, an observational study was set up to record possible (hypothesized) difference in bone formation between different width of the maxillary sinus itself. Therefore, a multicenter study was set up that foresaw a surgical intervention of sinus lift with lateral approach, the 6 months healing phase, the implant insertion in two sites with the implant site preparation made by a trephine bur to retrieve a bone specimen for histomorphometric examination without any additive invasively for the patient.

Read the detailed description

Material and Methods Study protocol This study was designed as a multicenter prospective study following STROBE (STrengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology) guidelines. All procedures were performed in strict accordance with the recommendations of the Declaration of Helsinki as revised in Fortaleza for investigations with human subjects. The study protocol had been approved by the relevant ethical committee (Comitato Etico Calabria-Sezione Area Nord n. 55/2016). Patients, after being thoroughly informed about the study protocol, the treatment, its alternatives and any potential risk, signed a written informed consent for the participation in the study and authorized the use of their data for research purposes.

Any patient with Kennedy class II partial edentulism requiring unilateral sinus floor elevation for the placement of two not adjacent dental implants supporting a fixed partial prosthesis was eligible for entering this study.

Pre-surgical phase Patients recruited in the present study underwent a careful clinical examination, including assessment of periodontal conditions (probing and periapical radiographs), evaluation of available bone volume in the edentulous areas on cone beam computed tomography and analysis of occlusal relationships (diagnostic wax-up). A surgical resin guide was manufactured by duplicating the diagnostic wax-up.

All patients received professional mechanical tooth cleaning and periodontal debridement one week prior to surgery and were prescribed with chlorhexidine digluconate 0.2% mouthwash twice a day.

Surgical procedure All patients underwent antibiotic prophylaxis (2 g single-dose amoxicillin one hour before surgery). After performing local anaesthesia (articaine 4% with epinephrine 1:100.000) and elevating a full-thickness flap, the surgical guide was placed in position and an antrostomy was created by consuming the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus with ultrasonic instrumentation in the area between the two planned implant sites. The sinus membrane was then carefully elevated and, after checking its integrity with visual inspection and Valsalva maneuver, the subantral space was filled with a composite graft in granules [50% cortico-cancellous porcine graft (Gen-Os, Tecnoss, Pianezza, Italy) - 50% synthetic nano-hydroxyapatite (Fisiograft Bone, Ghimas, Casalecchio di Reno, Italy)]. A resorbable bovine collagen membrane (Bio-Gide, Geistlich, Wolhusen, Switzerland) fixed with two pins was placed to cover the lateral antrostomy and flaps were sutured with Sentineri sutures and single stitches using synthetic monofilament. Patients were prescribed with antibiotics for 4 days (amoxicillin 1 g three times a day) and NSAID (ibuprofen 600 mg), when needed. Sutures were removed after 10 days.

After 6 months of healing, a cone beam tc scan was performed to evaluate the radiographic outcome of the regenerative procedure and to plan implant insertion. With the assistance of the surgical template, two bone-core biopsy biopsies were harvested in the planned implant sites by using 3-mm diameter trephine drills (2982.Y0.30, DenTag, Maniago, Italy) (Fig. 3-4). Dental implants were then inserted in the biopsy sites: after 5 months of submerged healing, they were restored with screwed ceramic crowns.

Radiographic measurements Radiographic measurements were taken from the three cone beam CT cross-sectional slices (step 1 mm; width 1 mm) corresponding to the position where the biopsy was retrieved. Two independent calibrated examiners (A.R. and Fe.Be.) measured residual bone height (RBH) between the alveolar ridge and the sinus floor; sinus width (SW) (distance between buccal and palatal walls at 10-mm level, comprising the residual alveolar crest. Distances were measured by using the specific tool of an imaging software (OsiriX MD, Pixmeo SARL, Bernex, Switzerland) and were expressed in millimeters. Intra-examiner reliability was assessed with Cohen's K test.

Sample processing for histological analysis Histologic and histomorphometric analyses of all specimens were performed by one of the authors (VN), blinded to the study design and to biopsy origin. Immediately after harvesting, biopsies were carefully rinsed with cold 5% glucose solution to remove blood remnants maintaining the correct osmolarity (278 milliosmole/L).

Specimens were subsequently fixed for three days in 10% buffered formalin solution at pH 7.2, and then dehydrated in an ascending series of alcohol rinses and embedded in a methacrylate resin (Technovit 7200 VLC, Kulzer, Wehrheim, Germany). After 12 days of polymerization, biopsies were cut along their longitudinal axis with a high-precision carborundum disk at 50 µm and then ground down under running water with a series of polishing discs to about 30 ± 10 µm. The slides were then mounted and stained with acid fuchsine-toluidine blue and von Kossa staining.

Histomorphometry The following variables were measured for each biopsy: total area of the biopsy (in mm2), percentage of newly-formed bone (NFB),percentage of connective tissue/marrow spaces (MS), and percentage of residual graft particles (RG). The analysis was performed using transmitted brightfield light microscope (Biostar B3; Exacta Optech, San Prospero, Italy), connected to high resolution digital camera (Moticam 5.0; Motic Microscopy, Kowloon, China). A software with image capturing capabilities (Image-Pro Plus 6.0; Media Cybernetics Inc., Bethesda, MD, U.S.A.) was used to analyze images. Software calibration was performed for each image analysis by using the "Calibration Wizard" tool, which reports the number of pixels between two selected points. Linear remapping of the pixel numbers was used to calibrate the distance in µm or in mm according to the magnification degree.

Predictor and outcome variables This prospective study tested the null hypothesis of no differences in new bone formation among areas of different width in the same sinus against the alternative hypothesis of a difference.

The primary predictor variables were sinus width (SW) and residual bone height (RBH).

Primary outcome measure:

  • new bone formation (NFB) after six months of healing

Secondary outcome measures:

  • residual graft (RG): after six months of healing
  • any complications or adverse events

Sample size calculation and statistical power A statistical software (Statistica per Discipline Biomediche, Version 6.0, Mc Graw-Hill, New York, NY, U.S.A.) was used to determine the sample size of this prospective study, basing on data of a previous publication. Expected difference in NFB (as mean percentage) between narrow and wide part of the sinus was 13.8±18.25% (using sinus width=13 mm as a cut-off). A sample of 16 histological specimens for each group was required to detect significant differences between the two groups (confidence level 5% with statistical power of 80%).

Statistical analysis An independent investigator (A.R.) analyzed all datasets with statistical software (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Data normality was assessed with Shapiro-Wilk test: all datasets met the required assumptions for using parametric methods. Descriptive statistics included mean and standard deviation. The value of α was set to 0.05.

Differences in NFB between mesial and distal sites were evaluated by means of paired samples t-test. The potential influence of sinus width and RBH on NFB and RG percentage was evaluated by using Pearson correlation coefficient.

Being tested
sinus floor elevation with lateral approach
Keywords
Sinus lift;, sinus elevation;, sinus width;, bone graft, histomorphometry, alveolar bone atrophy
Medical subject headings
Alveolar Bone Loss

What participants receive

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

  • sinus floor elevation with lateral approachProcedure or surgery

    sinus floor elevation with lateral approach. 6 months healing phase. implant site preparation with trephine bur and bone specimen retrieval.

Study groups in NCT04830670
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Large sinussame patient, sinus width > 12mm measured at 10mm from the alveolar crest at the planned implant site
Receives: Procedure: sinus floor elevation with lateral approach
narrow sinussame patient, sinus width < 12mm measured at 10mm from the alveolar crest at the planned implant site
Receives: Procedure: sinus floor elevation with lateral approach

What is being measured

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

  1. quantity (%) of newly formed bone

    quantity (%) of newly formed bone (NFB) in histomorphometric analysis

    Measured: 6 months

Secondary outcomes (2)
  1. quantity (%) of graft

    quantity (%) of residual graft (RG) in histomorphometric analysis

    Measured: 6 months

  2. quantity of complications

    quantity of any complications or adverse events

    Measured: through study completion, an average of 1 year

Timeline

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

  1. First posted5 Apr 2021
  2. Study start15 Mar 2017
  3. Primary completion15 Mar 2020
  4. Study completion15 Mar 2021

Resources

More details

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

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Case-control
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
16 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04830670
Sponsor's protocol ID
WIDE&NARROW
Status last verified
Apr 2021
First submitted
25 Mar 2021
Last updated
5 Apr 2021
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No: data will be shared after data managing and statistics

Publications

  • Stacchi C, Spinato S, Lombardi T, Bernardello F, Bertoldi C, Zaffe D, Nevins M. Minimally Invasive Management of Implant-Supported Rehabilitation in the Posterior Maxilla, Part I. Sinus Floor Elevation: Biologic Principles and Materials. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2020 May/Jun;40(3):e85-e93. doi: 10.11607/prd.4497.

    PubMed 32233183
  • Stacchi C, Spinato S, Lombardi T, Bernardello F, Bertoldi C, Zaffe D, Nevins M. Minimally Invasive Management of Implant-Supported Rehabilitation in the Posterior Maxilla, Part II. Surgical Techniques and Decision Tree. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2020 May/Jun;40(3):e95-e102. doi: 10.11607/prd.4498.

    PubMed 32233185
  • Stacchi C, Vercellotti T, Toschetti A, Speroni S, Salgarello S, Di Lenarda R. Intraoperative complications during sinus floor elevation using two different ultrasonic approaches: a two-center, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Jan;17 Suppl 1:e117-25. doi: 10.1111/cid.12136. Epub 2013 Aug 22.

    PubMed 23968289
  • Avila G, Wang HL, Galindo-Moreno P, Misch CE, Bagramian RA, Rudek I, Benavides E, Moreno-Riestra I, Braun T, Neiva R. The influence of the bucco-palatal distance on sinus augmentation outcomes. J Periodontol. 2010 Jul;81(7):1041-50. doi: 10.1902/jop.2010.090686.

    PubMed 20450402

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Alveolar Bone Resorption, run by International Piezosurgery Academy at 3 sites in Italy.

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 14 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 5 Apr 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 3 sites in Italy. 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?

quantity (%) of newly formed bone (time frame: 6 months). 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 NCT04830670, which also lists 4 linked publications.

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 5 Apr 2021.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in