Alveolar Bone AtrophyPhase 4NCT04506827
RCT With 3 Different Biomaterials for Maxillary Sinus Lift
A Phase 4 study testing Maxillary Sinus Augmentation, Maxillary Sinus Graft with ABBM and Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCP in people with Alveolar Bone Atrophy, run by University of Pisa at 1 site in Switzerland.
Trial summary
Background: Lateral maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA) is a predictable bone regeneration technique in case of atrophy of the posterior-upper maxilla. Aimed at obtaining quantity and quality of bone suitable for receiving osseointegrated implants, its success is largely due to the skill of the surgeon, but also to the… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Alveolar Bone Atrophy
- What is being tested?
- Maxillary Sinus Augmentation, Maxillary Sinus Graft with ABBM and Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCP
- Type of treatment
- Medical device, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 24 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSwitzerland
- Study dates
- 23 Feb 2017to 14 Dec 2019
- Phase
- Phase 4
- 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
- need for maxillary sinus augmentation
- 18 years or older
- residual ridge height less than 3mm
Who cannot join
- full contraindication to implant surgery,
- systemic diseases that could negatively influence wound healing;
- heavy smokers (more than 10 cigarettes/day);
- head and neck irradiation treatment;
- uncontrolled diabetes;
- chronic or acute sinus pathology;
Show all 9Show fewer
- uncontrolled periodontal disease;
- full mouth plaque and bleeding score higher than 25%,
- tooth extractions in the previous 2 months
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Maxillary Sinus Augmentation With Three Different Biomaterials: Histologic, Histomorphometric, Clinical and Patient Reported Outcomes From a Randomized Controlled Trial
Background: Lateral maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA) is a predictable bone regeneration technique in case of atrophy of the posterior-upper maxilla. Aimed at obtaining quantity and quality of bone suitable for receiving osseointegrated implants, its success is largely due to the skill of the surgeon, but also to the characteristics of the biomaterial used.
Methods: Twenty-four patients needing MSA were included in the study. The patients were randomly allocated to 3 different groups: Anorganic Bovine Bone Mineral (ABBM) as control, Tricalcium Phosphate (TCP) with or without hyaluronic acid (HA) as test groups. Nine months after MSA bone biopsies were harvested for the histomorphometric analysis. Secondary outcomes were mean bone gain, intraoperative and post-operative complications, implant insertion torque, implant failure and patient related outcome measures (PROMs).
Read the detailed description
The implant-prosthetic rehabilitation of the atrophic maxilla requires the creation of sufficient volumetric quantity of bone, through regeneration techniques, necessary to position the implants.
Maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA) is probably the most predictable and best performing technique.
The present randomized controlled study aims to evaluate and compare, histomorphometrically and clinically three different bone substitutes such as: ABBM, Tricalcium Phosphate (TCP) with or without the addition of hyaluronic acid (HA) that were used for lateral MSA. This study population will be followed until the 3rd year. This study describes histological differences between the three groups at 9 months.
All the patients enrolled in the study received a session of oral hygiene and a periodontal examination before the surgical procedure to obtain a more favorable oral environment for wound healing. A CBCT was mandatory for all included cases to verify that the maxillary sinus was clear and that the residual bone height was 3 mm or less. All the enrolled patients received 2 gr. of amoxicillin and clavulanic acid (or 600 mg. of clindamycin for those who were allergic to penicillins) as a pre-medication one-hour before surgery. All patients rinsed for 1 minute with 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash (and twice a day for the following 3 weeks). Local anesthesia was administered, a mid-crestal incision with mesial and distal release were performed to access the lateral bone wall of the maxillary sinus, subsequently, ultrasound bone surgery (Piezosurgery ®, Carasco, Italy) with specific tips was used for the bone window osteotomy (Figure 1-A). The Schneiderian membrane was reflected and lifted up medially with flat sinus curettes. Once the sinus membrane was completely lifted a bioabsorbable pericardium membrane (Smartbrane, Regedent AG, Zurich, Switzerland) was applied to protect it (Figure 1-B). The randomization sealed envelopes were opened and the clinician allocated the patients to one of the three experimental groups:
- Control group that received Demineralized Bovine Bone Mineral (Bio-Oss Cancellous, Geistlich, Wolhunsen, Switzerland);
- Test group 1 that received TCP with particle size ranging from 250 to 1000 µm (Osopia, Regedent, Zurich, Switzerland);
- Test group 2 that received TCP as in test group1 plus crosslinked Hyaluronic Acid (Hyadent BG, Regedent, Zurich, Switzerland) with a ratio 2 to 1. the bony window was repositioned, stabilized and covered with a resorbable pericardium membrane. Nine months after the MSA a CBCT analysis was required to evaluate the total bone height gain.
Depending on the treatment plan, between one and three implants, bone level (BL) or tissue level (TL), of two different manufacturers (Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland and Sweden \& Martina, Due Carrare, Italy) were positioned. While preparing the osteotomy implant site a bone biopsy was harvested using a trephine. The implant insertion torque was measured in Ncm for each implant.
All patients were prescribed 1gr amoxicillin + clavulanic acid twice daily for 7 days (for those who were allergic to penicillin 300mg clindamycin 3 times daily for 7 days) as post-operative prophylaxis. All patients received 8mg of dexamethasone immediately after surgery and 4 mg of dexamethasone per day were prescribed for the following 5 days. Analgesics were prescribed (1gr paracetamol 3 times daily) according to patients' need. The use of removable temporary restorations was not recommended during the healing period.
After an osseointegration period of 3 months, the implants were restored. The prosthetic procedures were similar for all groups, impressions were taken with a polyether rubber material (Impregum, Espe Dental AG, Seefeld, Germany) and a customized impression tray. Final Zirconia screw-retained restorations were delivered after a period of 2/3 weeks, peri-apical radiographs were taken and oral hygiene instructions were given to all participants in the study.
- Conditions
- Alveolar Bone Atrophy
- Being tested
- Maxillary Sinus Augmentation, Maxillary Sinus Graft with ABBM, Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCP, Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCP + HA
- Keywords
- Bone regeneration, Biomaterial(s), Implantology, Osseointegration
- 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.
Maxillary Sinus AugmentationProcedure or surgery
Biomaterial Graft into the Maxillary Sinus
Maxillary Sinus Graft with ABBMDevice
Also called Anorganic Bovine Bone Mineral (ABBM)
The maxillary sinuses in the control group are grafted with ABBM
Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCPDevice
Also called Tricalcium Phosphate (TCP)
The maxillary sinuses in the test1 group are grafted with TCP
Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCP + HADevice
Also called hyaluronic acid (HA)
The maxillary sinuses in the test1 group are grafted with TCP + HA
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control group | Active comparator | patients in the control group received Demineralized Bovine Bone Mineral for the maxillary sinus augmentation Receives: Procedure: Maxillary Sinus Augmentation; Device: Maxillary Sinus Graft with ABBM |
| Test group 1 | Experimental | patients in the test group 1 received TCP with particle size from 250 to 1000 µm Receives: Procedure: Maxillary Sinus Augmentation; Device: Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCP |
| Test group 2 | Experimental | patients in the test group 2 received TCP as in test group1 plus crosslinked Hyaluronic Acid Receives: Procedure: Maxillary Sinus Augmentation; Device: Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCP + HA |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Histomorphometric parameters of the augmented bone (descriptive)
Descriptive analysis of the specimen section at the microscope
Measured: 9 months
Histomorphometric parameters of the augmented bone (% of new bone, marrow, graft)
Percentages of newly formed bone, marrow spaces and residual graft particles are reported.
Measured: 9 months
Secondary outcomes (7)
Mean bone gain measured at 9 months through CBCT evaluation
radiographic evaluation
Measured: 9 months
Intra-operative
clinical evaluation (yes/no) of the presence or occurrence of: sinus membrane perforation, excessive bleeding, lateral sinus cortical bone fracture.
Measured: During surgery
Post-operative complications
clinical evaluation (yes/no) of the presence or occurrence of:symptoms of acute sinusitis, swelling, suppuration, bleeding, trismus, hematoma, wound dehiscence, acute infections.
Measured: one week
Post-operative complications
clinical evaluation (yes/no) of the presence or occurrence of:symptoms of chronic sinusitis, swelling, suppuration, wound dehiscence, acute infections.
Measured: 9 months
Implant insertion torque measured in Ncm
clinical evaluation
Measured: 9 months
Early implant failure
clinical evaluation of the osseointegration of the implant into the bone (yes/no)
Measured: 12 months
Patient reported outcome measures
All patients will answer a questionnaire regarding the oral health-related quality of life using the 14 questions of the short-form Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) (This questionnaire consists of 14 questions each one formulated in the following way: "How often (impact item) because of problems with your teeth, mouth or dentures?" The impact items belong to 7 different impact domains: 1. Functional limitations; 2. Physical pain; 3. Psychological discomfort; 4. Physical disability; 5. Psychological disability; 6. Social disability; 7. Handicap. Each question can be answered with a score from 0 to 4 corresponding to: 0 = never, 1 = hardly ever, 2 = occasionally, 3 = fairly often, and 4 = very often.)
Measured: 9 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted10 Aug 2020
- Study start23 Feb 2017
- Primary completion29 Jun 2019
- Study completion14 Dec 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Alveolar Bone AtrophyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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 4
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Three groups of patients will be treated with 3 different graft materials
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Pisa
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Antonio Barone, University of Pisa
- Investigators
- Nicola A Valente, DDS, MS, Study chair, University of Seville
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04506827
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- SinusAug
- Status last verified
- Aug 2020
- First submitted
- 22 Jul 2020
- Last updated
- 10 Aug 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Aug 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Maxillary Sinus Augmentation With Three Different Biomaterials: Histologic, Histomorphometric, Clinical and Patient Reported Outcomes From a Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04506827
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SinusAug
- Conditions
- Alveolar Bone Atrophy
- Keywords
- Bone regeneration, Biomaterial(s), Implantology, Osseointegration
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of PisaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 23 Feb 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 29 Jun 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 14 Dec 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 10 Aug 2020 (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.
Background: Lateral maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA) is a predictable bone regeneration technique in case of atrophy of the posterior-upper maxilla. Aimed at obtaining quantity and quality of bone suitable for receiving osseointegrated implants, its success is largely due to the skill of the surgeon, but also to the characteristics of the biomaterial used.
Methods: Twenty-four patients needing MSA were included in the study. The patients were randomly allocated to 3 different groups: Anorganic Bovine Bone Mineral (ABBM) as control, Tricalcium Phosphate (TCP) with or without hyaluronic acid (HA) as test groups. Nine months after MSA bone biopsies were harvested for the histomorphometric analysis. Secondary outcomes were mean bone gain, intraoperative and post-operative complications, implant insertion torque, implant failure and patient related outcome measures (PROMs).
Detailed description
The implant-prosthetic rehabilitation of the atrophic maxilla requires the creation of sufficient volumetric quantity of bone, through regeneration techniques, necessary to position the implants.
Maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA) is probably the most predictable and best performing technique.
The present randomized controlled study aims to evaluate and compare, histomorphometrically and clinically three different bone substitutes such as: ABBM, Tricalcium Phosphate (TCP) with or without the addition of hyaluronic acid (HA) that were used for lateral MSA. This study population will be followed until the 3rd year. This study describes histological differences between the three groups at 9 months.
All the patients enrolled in the study received a session of oral hygiene and a periodontal examination before the surgical procedure to obtain a more favorable oral environment for wound healing. A CBCT was mandatory for all included cases to verify that the maxillary sinus was clear and that the residual bone height was 3 mm or less. All the enrolled patients received 2 gr. of amoxicillin and clavulanic acid (or 600 mg. of clindamycin for those who were allergic to penicillins) as a pre-medication one-hour before surgery. All patients rinsed for 1 minute with 0.2% chlorhexidine mouthwash (and twice a day for the following 3 weeks). Local anesthesia was administered, a mid-crestal incision with mesial and distal release were performed to access the lateral bone wall of the maxillary sinus, subsequently, ultrasound bone surgery (Piezosurgery ®, Carasco, Italy) with specific tips was used for the bone window osteotomy (Figure 1-A). The Schneiderian membrane was reflected and lifted up medially with flat sinus curettes. Once the sinus membrane was completely lifted a bioabsorbable pericardium membrane (Smartbrane, Regedent AG, Zurich, Switzerland) was applied to protect it (Figure 1-B). The randomization sealed envelopes were opened and the clinician allocated the patients to one of the three experimental groups:
- Control group that received Demineralized Bovine Bone Mineral (Bio-Oss Cancellous, Geistlich, Wolhunsen, Switzerland);
- Test group 1 that received TCP with particle size ranging from 250 to 1000 µm (Osopia, Regedent, Zurich, Switzerland);
- Test group 2 that received TCP as in test group1 plus crosslinked Hyaluronic Acid (Hyadent BG, Regedent, Zurich, Switzerland) with a ratio 2 to 1. the bony window was repositioned, stabilized and covered with a resorbable pericardium membrane. Nine months after the MSA a CBCT analysis was required to evaluate the total bone height gain.
Depending on the treatment plan, between one and three implants, bone level (BL) or tissue level (TL), of two different manufacturers (Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland and Sweden \& Martina, Due Carrare, Italy) were positioned. While preparing the osteotomy implant site a bone biopsy was harvested using a trephine. The implant insertion torque was measured in Ncm for each implant.
All patients were prescribed 1gr amoxicillin + clavulanic acid twice daily for 7 days (for those who were allergic to penicillin 300mg clindamycin 3 times daily for 7 days) as post-operative prophylaxis. All patients received 8mg of dexamethasone immediately after surgery and 4 mg of dexamethasone per day were prescribed for the following 5 days. Analgesics were prescribed (1gr paracetamol 3 times daily) according to patients' need. The use of removable temporary restorations was not recommended during the healing period.
After an osseointegration period of 3 months, the implants were restored. The prosthetic procedures were similar for all groups, impressions were taken with a polyether rubber material (Impregum, Espe Dental AG, Seefeld, Germany) and a customized impression tray. Final Zirconia screw-retained restorations were delivered after a period of 2/3 weeks, peri-apical radiographs were taken and oral hygiene instructions were given to all participants in the study.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
- Model description
- Three groups of patients will be treated with 3 different graft materials
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control group | Active comparator | Procedure: Maxillary Sinus Augmentation, Device: Maxillary Sinus Graft with ABBMpatients in the control group received Demineralized Bovine Bone Mineral for the maxillary sinus augmentation |
| Test group 1 | Experimental | Procedure: Maxillary Sinus Augmentation, Device: Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCPpatients in the test group 1 received TCP with particle size from 250 to 1000 µm |
| Test group 2 | Experimental | Procedure: Maxillary Sinus Augmentation, Device: Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCP + HApatients in the test group 2 received TCP as in test group1 plus crosslinked Hyaluronic Acid |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- need for maxillary sinus augmentation
- 18 years or older
- residual ridge height less than 3mm
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- full contraindication to implant surgery,
- systemic diseases that could negatively influence wound healing;
- heavy smokers (more than 10 cigarettes/day);
- head and neck irradiation treatment;
- uncontrolled diabetes;
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Maxillary Sinus AugmentationBiomaterial Graft into the Maxillary Sinus | Procedure or surgery | Control group, Test group 1, Test group 2 |
| Maxillary Sinus Graft with ABBMAlso: Anorganic Bovine Bone Mineral (ABBM)The maxillary sinuses in the control group are grafted with ABBM | Device | Control group |
| Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCPAlso: Tricalcium Phosphate (TCP)The maxillary sinuses in the test1 group are grafted with TCP | Device | Test group 1 |
| Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCP + HAAlso: hyaluronic acid (HA)The maxillary sinuses in the test1 group are grafted with TCP + HA | Device | Test group 2 |
Primary outcome
Histomorphometric parameters of the augmented bone (descriptive)
Time frame: 9 months
Descriptive analysis of the specimen section at the microscope
Histomorphometric parameters of the augmented bone (% of new bone, marrow, graft)
Time frame: 9 months
Percentages of newly formed bone, marrow spaces and residual graft particles are reported.
7 secondary outcomes
Mean bone gain measured at 9 months through CBCT evaluation
Time frame: 9 months
Intra-operative
Time frame: During surgery
Post-operative complications
Time frame: one week
Post-operative complications
Time frame: 9 months
Implant insertion torque measured in Ncm
Time frame: 9 months
Early implant failure
Time frame: 12 months
Patient reported outcome measures
Time frame: 9 months
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 10 Aug 2020.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Alveolar Bone Atrophy
Active, not recruiting
L-PRF Block vs Composite Graft for Horizontal Ridge Augmentation
Alveolar Ridge Resorption After Extraction, Alveolar Bone Loss
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Diagnostic Accuracy of Large Language Models for Peri-Implant Marginal Bone Loss on Panoramic Radiographs
Peri-implantitis, Alveolar Bone Loss
Recruiting
Two Bovine Xenografts in Lateral Window Sinus Augmentation With or Without Bone Marrow Blood
Alveolar Bone Loss, Sinus Floor Augmentation
Recruiting
The Application of a Biphasic Calcium Sulfate Graft Material in Sinus Floor Elevation
Alveolar Bone Loss, Edentulism Nos
Enrolling by invitation
Investigation of the Effect of Horizontal Platelet Rich Fibrin Placed in Tooth Extraction Sockets on Bone Formation
Tooth Loss, Dental Implant Failed
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.
Nicola A Valente, DDS, MS study chair
University of Seville
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Maxillary Sinus Augmentation, Maxillary Sinus Graft with ABBM and Maxillary Sinus Graft with TCP in people with Alveolar Bone Atrophy, run by University of Pisa at 1 site in Switzerland.
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 9 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 10 Aug 2020. 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 Switzerland. 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.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
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?
Histomorphometric parameters of the augmented bone (descriptive) (time frame: 9 months). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 10 Aug 2020.