Condylar Neck FracturesNCT06940115
Clinical and Radiographical Assessment of Patients With Sub-condylar Fracture Using Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Trapezoidal Plates Versus Titanium Trapezoidal Plates
A study testing titanium trapezoidal plates and PEEK trapezoidal plates in people with Condylar Neck Fractures and Polyetheretherketone, run by Cairo University at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
Some of titanium's drawbacks that is commonly used in maxillofacial surgery included scatter artefacts on regular imaging, implant exposure and inflammation, high thermal conductivity, and high elastic modulus. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Condylar Neck Fractures, Polyetheretherketone, Mandible Fracture
- What is being tested?
- titanium trapezoidal plates and PEEK trapezoidal plates
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 24 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 1 May 2025to 15 Aug 2026
- 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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients aged 18 years or older, irrespective of gender
- Recent mandibular subcondylar fractures indicated for open reduction and internal fixation
Who cannot join
- Medically compromised patients contradicting operation (ASA III, IV \& V).
- Patients receiving radiotherapy or chemotherapy.
- Infection at the fracture line.
- Pathological fractures and old fractures
- comminuted fractures
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Clinical and Radiographical Assessment of Patients With Sub-condylar Fracture Using CAD/CAM Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Trapezoidal Plates Versus CAD/CAM Titanium Trapezoidal Plates: Randomized Controlled Clinical Study
Some of titanium's drawbacks that is commonly used in maxillofacial surgery included scatter artefacts on regular imaging, implant exposure and inflammation, high thermal conductivity, and high elastic modulus. Very few clinical studies have been published on using a PEEK plate in the mandibular fractures and to the best of the author's knowledge, this is the first study that will be done comparing trapezoidal condylar 3D printed PEEK plates and titanium trapezoidal condylar plate in subcondylar fractures in terms of clinical and radiographical outcomes.
Read the detailed description
Mandibular subcondylar fractures are common injuries that require treatment to restore function and aesthetic. Titanium plates have long been the gold standard for fixation in these fractures due to their strength, durability, and ability to provide rigid stabilization. However, they are associated with limitations such as a higher elastic modulus than bone, imaging artifacts (e.g., CT or MRI interference), and hardware-related complications. These drawbacks have prompted interest in alternative materials like polyetheretherketone (PEEK).
PEEK is a novel biomaterial with promising properties, including biocompatibility, a modulus of elasticity closer to bone, and reduced imaging artifacts. These characteristics suggest it may mitigate some of the challenges associated with titanium plates. The improved elasticity of PEEK could reduce stress shielding and enhance functional recovery, while its imaging compatibility could simplify postoperative assessments.
Researchers have shown significant interest in the application of PEEK composites in trauma plating systems, total replacement implants, and tissue scaffolds, highlighting its potential as a versatile biomaterial. Despite these advantages, evidence specifically evaluating PEEK trapezoidal plates for subcondylar fractures remains scarce, there are a no clinical studies directly comparing the outcomes of PEEK and titanium trapezoidal plates in terms of clinical outcomes. Conducting a study to evaluate these two materials would provide valuable evidence to guide material selection in mandibular subcondylar fracture management.
- Being tested
- titanium trapezoidal plates, PEEK trapezoidal plates
- Keywords
- PEEK PLATES, TRAPEZOIDAL PLATES, CAD/CAM
- Medical subject headings
- Mandibular Fractures
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
titanium trapezoidal platesOther
ORIF subcondylar fracture using trapezoidal titanium plates
PEEK trapezoidal platesOther
ORIF subcondylar fracture using trapezoidal PEEK plates
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| control group | Experimental | CAD/CAM titanium trapezoidal plates Receives: Other: titanium trapezoidal plates |
| comparator group | Experimental | CAD/CAM polyetheretherketone (PEEK) trapezoidal plates Receives: Other: PEEK trapezoidal plates |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Maximum mouth opening
Maximum mouth opening is the distance between the incisal edges of the upper and lower central incisors at the midline when the mouth is opened as wide as possible without pain. It will be measured in millimeters (mm) using a caliper
Measured: outcome will be measured postoperatively in 4 different time points. 1st time point is at 1 week after surgery. 2nd time is point at 1 month after surgery. 3rd time point is at 3 months after surgery. 4th time point is at 6 months after surgery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Apr 2025
- Study start1 May 2025
- Primary completion1 Jun 2026
- Study completion15 Aug 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Condylar Neck FracturesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Cairo UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Cairo University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ibrahim Yousef Badrasawi, Cairo University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06940115
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PEEK plate in condyle fracture
- Status last verified
- Mar 2025
- First submitted
- 8 Apr 2025
- Last updated
- 8 Sep 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Sep 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Clinical and Radiographical Assessment of Patients With Sub-condylar Fracture Using CAD/CAM Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Trapezoidal Plates Versus CAD/CAM Titanium Trapezoidal Plates: Randomized Controlled Clinical Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06940115
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PEEK plate in condyle fracture
- Keywords
- PEEK PLATES, TRAPEZOIDAL PLATES, CAD/CAM
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Cairo UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 May 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Jun 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 15 Aug 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Apr 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Some of titanium's drawbacks that is commonly used in maxillofacial surgery included scatter artefacts on regular imaging, implant exposure and inflammation, high thermal conductivity, and high elastic modulus. Very few clinical studies have been published on using a PEEK plate in the mandibular fractures and to the best of the author's knowledge, this is the first study that will be done comparing trapezoidal condylar 3D printed PEEK plates and titanium trapezoidal condylar plate in subcondylar fractures in terms of clinical and radiographical outcomes.
Detailed description
Mandibular subcondylar fractures are common injuries that require treatment to restore function and aesthetic. Titanium plates have long been the gold standard for fixation in these fractures due to their strength, durability, and ability to provide rigid stabilization. However, they are associated with limitations such as a higher elastic modulus than bone, imaging artifacts (e.g., CT or MRI interference), and hardware-related complications. These drawbacks have prompted interest in alternative materials like polyetheretherketone (PEEK).
PEEK is a novel biomaterial with promising properties, including biocompatibility, a modulus of elasticity closer to bone, and reduced imaging artifacts. These characteristics suggest it may mitigate some of the challenges associated with titanium plates. The improved elasticity of PEEK could reduce stress shielding and enhance functional recovery, while its imaging compatibility could simplify postoperative assessments.
Researchers have shown significant interest in the application of PEEK composites in trauma plating systems, total replacement implants, and tissue scaffolds, highlighting its potential as a versatile biomaterial. Despite these advantages, evidence specifically evaluating PEEK trapezoidal plates for subcondylar fractures remains scarce, there are a no clinical studies directly comparing the outcomes of PEEK and titanium trapezoidal plates in terms of clinical outcomes. Conducting a study to evaluate these two materials would provide valuable evidence to guide material selection in mandibular subcondylar fracture management.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| control group | Experimental | Other: titanium trapezoidal platesCAD/CAM titanium trapezoidal plates |
| comparator group | Experimental | Other: PEEK trapezoidal platesCAD/CAM polyetheretherketone (PEEK) trapezoidal plates |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Patients aged 18 years or older, irrespective of gender
- Recent mandibular subcondylar fractures indicated for open reduction and internal fixation
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Medically compromised patients contradicting operation (ASA III, IV \& V).
- Patients receiving radiotherapy or chemotherapy.
- Infection at the fracture line.
- Pathological fractures and old fractures
- comminuted fractures
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| titanium trapezoidal platesORIF subcondylar fracture using trapezoidal titanium plates | Other | control group |
| PEEK trapezoidal platesORIF subcondylar fracture using trapezoidal PEEK plates | Other | comparator group |
Primary outcome
Maximum mouth opening
Time frame: outcome will be measured postoperatively in 4 different time points. 1st time point is at 1 week after surgery. 2nd time is point at 1 month after surgery. 3rd time point is at 3 months after surgery. 4th time point is at 6 months after surgery
Maximum mouth opening is the distance between the incisal edges of the upper and lower central incisors at the midline when the mouth is opened as wide as possible without pain. It will be measured in millimeters (mm) using a caliper
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Sep 2026.
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing titanium trapezoidal plates and PEEK trapezoidal plates in people with Condylar Neck Fractures and Polyetheretherketone, run by Cairo 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 2 inclusion and 5 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 8 Sep 2026. 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?
Maximum mouth opening (time frame: outcome will be measured postoperatively in 4 different time points. 1st time point is at 1 week after surgery. 2nd time is point at 1 month after surgery. 3rd time point is at 3 months after surgery. 4th time point is at 6 months after surgery). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 8 Sep 2026.