AzTrials
AzTrials

Horizontal Alveolar Ridge DeficiencyNCT07883603

Autogenous and Xenograft Bone Mix in Alveolar Ridge Reconstruction

A study testing 25% Autogenous + 75% Xenograft and 50% Autogenous + 50% Xenograft in people with Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Deficiency, run by salah mohamed mohamed ibrahim ibrahim at 1 site in Egypt.

Not yet recruiting

Opening soon. The study is approved but enrolment has not started yet. Sites may already take enquiries.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Following a tooth extraction, the loss of alveolar bone is inevitable. As the site remodels, the alveolar ridge naturally shrinks in both height and width (Schropp et al., 2003). Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 20 to 60 years
Conditions the study is for
Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Deficiency
What is being tested?
25% Autogenous + 75% Xenograft and 50% Autogenous + 50% Xenograft
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
30 participants
Where
1 siteEgypt
Study dates
1 Oct 2026to 1 Sep 2027
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

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 20 to 60 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult

Who may be able to join

  • Age Range: Patients aged 20-60 years (Slagter et al., 2021).
  • Dentition Status: Partial edentulism in the posterior mandible involving the loss of two or more teeth.
  • Ridge Dimensions: Severely deficient alveolar ridge width (≤ 4 mm) paired with adequate residual vertical bone height (≥ 9 mm) (Thoma et al., 2017).
  • Systemic Health: Free from systemic diseases that could impair healing (Donos et al., 2015).
  • Inter-arch Space: Sufficient intermaxillary clearance (8-12 mm) to accommodate the definitive prosthetic components (Misch et al., 2005).
  • Oral Hygiene: Satisfactory oral hygiene status (Sälzer et al., 2020).
  • Compliance: Patient cooperative and willing to adhere to a 6-month post-operative follow-up regimen.

Who cannot join

  • Tobacco Use: Current smokers (Chrcanovic et al., 2015).
  • Local Pathology: Presence of active pathological lesions (such as abscesses, cysts, or acute infections) at the surgical site (Atef et al., 2020).
  • Pregnancy: Pregnant patients.
  • Metabolic Status: Patients with uncontrolled diabetes.
  • Pharmacological Interferences: Patients taking medications that alter bone metabolism or soft tissue healing (e.g., systemic corticosteroids, bisphosphonates, or undergoing chemotherapy/radiotherapy).

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

Egypt1 site
  • Cairo University

    Giza

Other trials in Egypt

About this study

Official title: A Clinical and Radiographic Study on the Efficacy of a 25-75% Autogenous-Xenograft Mix Versus a 50-50% Autogenous-Xenograft Mix for Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Reconstruction.

Following a tooth extraction, the loss of alveolar bone is inevitable. As the site remodels, the alveolar ridge naturally shrinks in both height and width (Schropp et al., 2003). This loss of bone volume can make dental implant placement challenging, frequently requiring bone grafting procedures to rebuild the necessary foundation for the implant.Guided bone regeneration (GBR) stands as a leading strategy for repairing osseous defects. When employing particulate bone grafts, this approach typically depends on the application of barrier membranes to promote the regeneration of bone tissue (Retzepi \& Donos, 2010).Various regenerative approaches have been proposed to restore ridge width: among these, guided bone regeneration (GBR) using a combination of autogenous bone and xenogenic grafts has gained widespread acceptance due to its biological properties and ability to achieve stable dimensional augmentation (Urban et al., 2013).Historically, various methods have been implemented to enhance both the volume and structural integrity of newly formed bone. An ideal graft material must act as an effective osteoconductive scaffold, facilitating cellular ingrowth while preserving its dimensional stability. Although autogenous bone is still considered the gold standard for these procedures, it is prone to significant volumetric resorption as time progresses (Gulinelli et al., 2017).To counteract volume loss during the remodeling process, researchers have proposed combining autogenous bone with allogenic, xenogenic, or alloplastic substitutes (Chappuis et al., 2017). This composite grafting strategy is designed to enhance both the structural stability and overall quality of the augmented site, while simultaneously decreasing surgical morbidity by minimizing the volume of autogenous bone required for harvest (Mendoza-Azpur et al., 2019).

Even though composite grafts are routinely employed in clinical practice, the ideal proportion of autogenous bone to xenogenic material in guided bone regeneration (GBR) protocols has yet to be definitively established.

Being tested
25% Autogenous + 75% Xenograft, 50% Autogenous + 50% Xenograft
Keywords
Horizontal alveolar ridge reconstruction, Alveolar ridge augmentation, Autogenous bone graft, Xenograft, Autogenous-xenograft mixture, Horizontal ridge augmentation, Alveolar ridge deficiency

What participants receive

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

  • 25% Autogenous + 75% XenograftProcedure or surgery

    25% autogenous bone + 75% xenograft for horizontal alveolar ridge reconstruction

  • 50% Autogenous + 50% XenograftProcedure or surgery

    50% autogenous bone + 50% xenograft for horizontal alveolar ridge reconstruction

Study groups in NCT07883603
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
25% Autogenous + 75% XenograftExperimental25% autogenous bone + 75% xenograft for horizontal alveolar ridge reconstruction
Receives: Procedure: 25% Autogenous + 75% Xenograft
50% Autogenous + 50% XenograftExperimental50% autogenous bone + 50% xenograft for horizontal alveolar ridge reconstruction
Receives: Procedure: 50% Autogenous + 50% Xenograft

What is being measured

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

  1. Radiographic Horizontal Bone Gain

    The radiographic horizontal bone gain will be assessed by comparing the horizontal alveolar ridge width before guided bone regeneration and at 6 months postoperatively using standardized CBCT measurements at predetermined reference points.

    Measured: Baseline to 6 months postoperatively

Secondary outcomes (10)
  1. Clinical Horizontal Bone Gain

    Clinical horizontal bone gain will be assessed by measuring the alveolar ridge width at standardized reference points using a periodontal caliper before surgery and at 6 months postoperatively

    Measured: Baseline to 6 months postoperatively

  2. Quality of Bone

    The quality of the regenerated bone will be evaluated histologically from a core biopsy obtained from the augmented site at the time of implant placement. Histological assessment will characterize the quality and composition of the regenerated bone

    Measured: 6 months postoperatively, at implant placement

  3. Vertical Bone Gain

    Vertical bone gain will be assessed radiographically by comparing standardized CBCT measurements obtained before guided bone regeneration and at 6 months postoperatively.

    Measured: Baseline to 6 months postoperatively

  4. Keratinized Tissue Width

    The width of keratinized tissue will be measured clinically at standardized sites using a UNC-15 graduated periodontal probe at baseline and at 6 months postoperatively.

    Measured: Baseline and 3 and 6 months after augmentation

  5. Soft Tissue Thickness

    Soft tissue thickness will be measured at standardized sites using a needle with a stopper before treatment and at 6 months postoperatively.

    Measured: Baseline and 3 and 6 months after augmentation

  6. Incidence of Postoperative Infection

    The incidence of postoperative infection will be recorded based on the presence or absence of clinical signs of infection, including swelling, suppuration, pain, or other clinical findings requiring intervention or antibiotic treatment.

    Measured: 1 week, 2 weeks, and 6 months after augmentation

  7. Postoperative Edema

    Postoperative facial edema will be assessed using a flexible measuring thread at standardized facial reference points and recorded as the change in facial measurements following surgery

    Measured: 1 week and 2 weeks after augmentation

  8. Procedural Time

    The total procedural time will be measured from the beginning of the surgical procedure until completion of wound closure using a stopwatch.

    Measured: During the surgical procedure

  9. Postoperative Pain

    Patient-reported postoperative pain will be assessed using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) during the postoperative follow-up period.

    Measured: Day 1 to Day 14 after augmentation

  10. Implant Primary Stability

    Implant primary stability will be assessed at the time of implant placement using resonance frequency analysis and recorded as the Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ).

    Measured: 6 months postoperatively, at implant placement

Timeline

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

  1. First posted20 Oct 2026
  2. Study start1 Oct 2026 (estimated)
  3. Primary completion1 Sep 2027 (estimated)
  4. Study completion1 Sep 2027 (estimated)

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
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
The control group in this study utilizes a 50:50 ratio of autogenous bone to xenograft, a well-established composite grafting protocol frequently employed in guided bone regeneration (Urban et al., 2011). This specific blend provides an optimal equilibrium between the biological vitality of the autograft and the dimensional stability of the xenograft. The intervention group employs a 25:75 autogenous-to-xenograft ratio, designed to maximize volume stability without sacrificing adequate osteogenic potential. By comparing these formulations, this study aims to ascertain whether a decreased concentration of autogenous bone still yields successful regenerative outcomes during horizontal ridge augmentation using the sausage technique.
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
30 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT07883603
Sponsor's protocol ID
PER 6-3-2 GBR
Status last verified
Oct 2026
First submitted
3 Oct 2026
Last updated
20 Oct 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No: Individual participant data will not be shared with other researchers because no specific plan for IPD sharing has been established, and participant-level data will be retained by the research team for study and academic purposes.

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing 25% Autogenous + 75% Xenograft and 50% Autogenous + 50% Xenograft in people with Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Deficiency, run by salah mohamed mohamed ibrahim ibrahim 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 7 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: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Oct 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?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

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

Contact Salah Ibrahim, B.Sc. (02 01097010949, salah.ibrahim@dentistry.cu.edu.eg), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Radiographic Horizontal Bone Gain (time frame: Baseline to 6 months postoperatively). 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 20 Oct 2026.

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