Periodontal Bone LossNCT06647186
Evaluation of Non-Incised Papillae Surgical Approach (NIPSA) Versus Conventional Flap in Periodontal Reconstructive Surgery of Intrabony Defects (Clinical and Radiographic Study)
A study testing Non Incised Papillae Surgical Approach and Conventional flap design in people with Periodontal Bone Loss, run by Bassant Hamdy Mowafey at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of Non-Incised Papillae Surgical Approach (NIPSA) versus conventional flap with mineralized Freeze-Dried Bone Allograft (FDBA) in periodontal reconstructive surgery of intrabony defects (Clinical and Radiographic study). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 30 to 50 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Periodontal Bone Loss
- What is being tested?
- Non Incised Papillae Surgical Approach and Conventional flap design
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 12 Jun 2023to 1 Sep 2024
- 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 30 to 50 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients with stage III/IV periodontitis.
- Age Group between 30 to 50 years old.
- Active residual pockets (positive bleeding on probing) associated with intrabony defects.
- Periodontal lesions with probing depth (PD) ≥ 5 mm and extension of the intrabony defect ≥ 3 mm.
- Vertical intrabony periodontal defects, always involving the buccal aspect.
Who cannot join
- Systemic disease contraindicating periodontal surgery.
- Smokers.
- Diabetic patients.
- Pregnant patients.
- Third molars or teeth with incorrect endodontic or restorative treatment.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Egypt1 site
Faculty of Dentistry Mansoura Univesity
Al Mansurah, Dakahlia Governorate, 35516
About this study
Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of Non-Incised Papillae Surgical Approach (NIPSA) versus conventional flap with mineralized Freeze-Dried Bone Allograft (FDBA) in periodontal reconstructive surgery of intrabony defects (Clinical and Radiographic study).
Patients and methods: Twenty patients with stage III/IV periodontitis with vertical intraosseous defect treated with NIPSA plus FDBA (n=10) or Conventional flap plus FDBA (n=10) were analysed. All patients met the same inclusion criteria and were treated following the same protocol, except for the surgical management of soft tissue (NIPSA versus Conventional flap). Clinical parameters were assessed at baseline, three months and sixmonths. Radiographic parameters were assessed at baseline and six months.
Read the detailed description
IPatients' selection: Twenty patients with periodontitis were diagnosed with vertical intra-osseous periodontal defects. They were selected from the Department of Oral Medicine and Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University putting into consideration certain inclusion and exclusion criteria. The patients have known all of the needed information about the treatment protocols and the materials they would receive. All possible risks and other treatment options had been reviewed and explained to the patients. The patients were cooperative and they understood this explanation. Written consent had been taken from each patient before performing any steps and approved from the ethical committee of our college
Inclusion criteria:
- Patients with stage III/IV periodontitis.
- Age Group between 30 to 50 years old.
- Active residual pockets (positive bleeding on probing) associated with intrabony defects.
- Periodontal lesions with probing depth (PD) ≥ 5 mm and extension of the intrabony defect ≥ 3 mm.
- Vertical intrabony periodontal defects, always involving the buccal aspect.
Exclusion criteria:
- Systemic disease contraindicating periodontal surgery.
- Smokers.
- Diabetic patients.
- Pregnant patients.
- Third molars or teeth with incorrect endodontic or restorative treatment.
Study Design:
This parallel randomized controlled clinical trial included twenty patients.
The patients selected were classified into two groups:
- Group 1 (Study group): Included ten patients with stage III/IV periodontitis and PD ≥ 5 mm. These patients undergone periodontal treatment using NIPSA procedure in addition to mineralized FDBA substitute for vertical intrabony defects regeneration.
- Group II (Control group): Included ten patients with stage III/IV periodontitis and PD ≥ 5 mm. These patients undergone periodontal treatment using conventional flap procedure in addition to mineralized FDBA substitute for vertical intrabony defects regeneration.
Clinical Periodontal Assessment:
The clinical assessment was performed for all patients at baseline, three and six months after periodontal treatment.
Plaque Index:
It was used to assess the amount of plaque at the gingival third of the tooth. Light source, dental mirrors, sharp dental explorers, periodontal probes and the dryness of the surface of the teeth and gingiva using air were used for scoring the plaque index. Therefore, only the plaque of the cervical third of the tooth was evaluated without regarding extension of the plaque on the middle and incisal thirds.
Gingival Bleeding Index:
The Gingival bleeding index was adopted by Ramfjord to measure the severity of gingivitis and its extension. Measurements of the index were taken from all surfaces of the teeth. A periodontal probe was used for recording the scores from four gingival areas of the tooth which were the distofacial papilla, facial gingival margins, mesiofacial papilla and entire lingual gingival margin of the tooth.
Probing Depth:
Probing depth was measured by special periodontal probe which was (UNC-15 probe). The index focused on how much the periodontal probe went deeper in the periodontal pockets and the reading was taken from the free gingival margin of tooth to the base of the pockets. Measurements were taken from different surfaces per each tooth.
Which were the distofacial surface, mid facial surface, mesiofacial surface, mesio-lingual surface, mid lingual surface and disto-lingual surfaces of the tooth. Adding the six scores per each tooth and dividing it by six gave the mean score for that tooth and to get the index score for the person; the scores for each tooth were added and then were divided by the number of all examined teeth.
Clinical Attachment Loss:
The CAL is the measurement of the distance from a fixed reference point (typically the cemento-enamel junction, CEJ) to the base of the periodontal pocket. It provides valuable information about the extent of attachment loss around teeth. A calibrated periodontal probe (UNC-15) was used to measure probing depth (PD) and calculate CAL. Insert the probe gently into the gingival sulcus or pocket, parallel to the long axis of the tooth, and record the depth from the CEJ to the base of the sulcus or pocket. Measure CAL at multiple sites (e.g., mesial, distal, buccal, lingual) around each tooth to account for variations in attachment loss.
Gingival Recession:
Gingival recession refers to the exposure of the tooth root surface due to the apical migration of the gingival margin. Therefore, gingival recession is associated with the destruction of both soft and hard tissue. It is an important clinical parameter to assess in periodontal evaluations. Gingival recession was measured from the CEJ to the current position of the gingival margin using (UNC-15 probe) inserted gently into the gingival sulcus or pocket, parallel to the long axis of the tooth.
Width of Keratinized Tissue:
Adequate width of keratinized tissue is associated with better periodontal health outcomes, including reduced risk of gingival recession and attachment loss. During periodontal surgeries, adequate keratinized tissue facilitates better wound healing and enhances the success of procedures like gingival grafting. Keratinized tissue width was measured using (UNC-15 probe) from the gingival margin to the mucogingival junction, at the mid-buccal point.
Location of the Tip of the Papilla:
Taking as a reference the central axis of the tooth, the distance from the CEJ in the zenith of the tooth to the vertex of the papilla. The manual UNC-15 probe was used to measure the distance.
Radiographic assessment:
Radiographic interpretation of the intrabony defect was done using CBCT at baseline and 6 months post-operatively. Landmarks were identified using CBCT including the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ), the alveolar crest (AC), the base of the defect (BD) and the depth of intrabony defect (ID).The depth of intrabony defect (ID) was measured as the difference between the distance from (CEJ) to (BD) and (CEJ) to (AC).
- Surgical Intervention:
Pre surgical phase:
Phase I therapy according to the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP); the S3 Level Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG). The first step in therapy was intended to remove supragingival calculus using ultrasonic scalers and guide behaviour change by encouraging the patient to increase the efficacy of oral hygiene (motivation, oral hygiene instructions) in the form of brushing, flossing, and mouthwash. Prescription of chlorhexidine mouth wash twice daily and the patient was scheduled for a follow-up appointment after 7 days.
The second step of therapy (cause-related therapy) was aimed at controlling (reducing/eliminating) the subgingival biofilm and calculus (subgingival instrumentation) with possible removal of root surface (cementum). Subgingival instrumentation was supplemented with the irrigation of chlorhexidine solution and systemic antibiotic (Metronidazole 500mg) twice daily for 5 days.
All patients were scheduled for a follow-up appointment 2 weeks after step 2 of therapy. The clinical periodontal assessment was re-evaluated to assess if therapy goals were achieved and to verify the eligibility for participating in the study before starting the surgical phase.
Surgical phase:
Group I (NIPSA):
After administration of local anesthesia, using blade number 15, a single horizontal or oblique incision was made in the mucosa located on the cortical bone tissue, apically at the edge of the bone crest that delimited the intrabony defect and as far as possible from the marginal tissues. The mesiodistal extension of the incision was sufficient to allow access to the defect, expose its limits, and allow correct debridement of the periodontal pocket and the application of biomaterials.
Tissue coronal to the incision was raised to full thickness from the incision line to expose the bone peaks delimiting the intrabony defect. In patients with lingual defect, we were able to has a lingual component, the area was accessed using buccal access. The granulation tissue was removed from the bone walls of the defect. Dental plaque and calculus deposits were removed from the root surface with ultrasonic scaler tips and micro-minicurettes.
Group II (Conventional flap):
After administration of local anesthesia, using blade number 15, intrasulcular incision was made splitting the buccal papilla from the palatal papilla. All defects were approached by elevating a flap only on the buccal side and leaving the oral portion of the interdental supracrestal soft tissues undetached. The full-thickness elevation of the marginal portion of the flap was performed with a microsurgical periosteal elevator.
After removal of granulation tissue from the bone walls of the defect, root and defect debridement was performed with manual and mechanical (ultrasonic) instruments with tips for subgingival instrumentation.
Application of bone graft material:
A solution of 24% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) was applied to the root surface in all the patients in the two groups, and after 2 min, irrigation with abundant saline solution then allograft bone material; mineralized (FDBA) spongy powder crushed bone preparation of natural cadaver (cadaveric origin) was mixed with sterile saline solution together to produce stable viscous bone graft material then packed into the periodontal defect during surgery.
Suturing technique: NIPSA group: The incision was sutured with a double suture line; the first line with horizontal internal mattress sutures to approximate the connective tissue of the mucosal edges of the incision. The second line with simple interrupted sutures, interrupted sutures help to bring the wound edges together counterbalancing the eversion caused by the horizontal mattress sutures. Conventional group: The incision was sutured with simple interrupted sutures.
Post-operative instructions: All patients received Amoxicillin (Augmentin) 1000 mg every 12h for 5 days. Postoperative pain and inflammation were controlled using ibuprofen (Brufen) 600 mg (or acetaminophen (Doliprane) 1000mg in patients allergic to ibuprofen). Patients rinsed with 0.2% chlorhexidine hydrochloride (Orovex) twice daily for 1 week, without mechanical hygiene on the surgical area.
Statistical analysis of the data Data were fed to the computer and analysed using IBM SPSS software package version 20.0. (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp) Qualitative data were described using number and percent. Shapiro-Wilk test was used to verify the normality of distribution. Quantitative data were described using range (minimum and maximum), mean, standard deviation, median and interquartile range (IQR). Significance of the obtained results was judged at the 5% level.
The used tests were
- - Chi-square test For categorical variables, to compare different groups.
- - Student t-test For normally distributed quantitative variables, to compare between two studied groups.
- - Paired t-test For normally distributed quantitative variables, to compare between two periods.
- - ANOVA with repeated measures For normally distributed quantitative variables, to compare between more than two periods or stages and Post Hoc Test (adjusted Bonferron) for pairwise comparisons.
- - Mann Whitney test For abnormally distributed quantitative variables, to compare between two studied groups.
- - Friedman test For abnormally distributed quantitative variables, to compare between more than two periods or stages and Post Hoc Test (Dunn's) for pairwise comparisons.
- Conditions
- Periodontal Bone Loss
- Being tested
- Non Incised Papillae Surgical Approach, Conventional flap design
- Keywords
- Periodontitis, Periodontal regeneration
- Medical subject headings
- Alveolar Bone Loss, Periodontitis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Non Incised Papillae Surgical ApproachProcedure or surgery
Also called NIPSA
Ten patients were included in this group, phase I therapy (scaling, root planing and oral hygiene measures) was performed. A single horizontal or oblique incision was made in the mucosa located on the cortical bone tissue, apical to the intrabony defect. The mesiodistal extension of the incision was sufficient to allow access to the defect. Tissue coronal to the incision was raised to full thickness from the incision line to expose the bone peaks delimiting the intrabony defect. The granulation tissue was removed from the bone walls of the defect. Dental plaque and calculus deposits were removed from the root surface with ultrasonic scaler tips and micro-minicurettes. A solution of 24% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) was applied to the root surface for 2 min, irrigation with saline solution then allograft bone material was packed into the periodontal defect. The incision was sutured with horizontal internal mattress sutures then simple interrupted sutures.
Conventional flap designProcedure or surgery
Also called Single flap approach
Ten patients were included in this group, phase I therapy (scaling, root planing and oral hygiene measures) was performed. Intrasulcular incision was made splitting the buccal papilla from the palatal papilla. All defects were approached by elevating a flap only on the buccal side and leaving the oral portion of the interdental supracrestal soft tissues undetached. The full-thickness elevation of the marginal portion of the flap was performed with a microsurgical periosteal elevator.
After removal of granulation tissue from the bone walls of the defect, root and defect debridement was performed with manual and mechanical (ultrasonic) instruments with tips for subgingival instrumentation.
A solution of 24% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) was applied to the root surface for 2 min, irrigation with saline solution then allograft bone material was packed into the periodontal defect. The incision was sutured with simple interrupted sutures.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Study group | Active comparator | Ten patients treated with Non-Incised Papillae Surgical Approach (NIPSA) plus Allograft bone substitute Receives: Procedure: Non Incised Papillae Surgical Approach |
| Control group | Active comparator | Ten patients treated with Conventional Flap plus Allograft bone substitute Receives: Procedure: Conventional flap design |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Gingival Recession
Measured: Three and six months
Secondary outcomes (7)
Location of the tip of the papilla
Measured: Three and six months
Width of keratenized tissue
Measured: Three and six months
Probing depth reduction
Measured: Three and six months
Clinical attachment gain
Measured: Three and six months
Plaque index
Measured: Three and six months
Gingival bleeding index
Measured: Three and six months
Bone gain
Measured: Six months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Oct 2024
- Study start12 Jun 2023
- Primary completion20 Dec 2023
- Study completion1 Sep 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Periodontal Bone LossStudies 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Bassant Hamdy Mowafey
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Bassant Hamdy Mowafey, Mansoura University
- Investigators
- Professor Una Mohamed ElShinnawi, Study chair, Faculty of Dentistry Mansoura University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06647186
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- A10020822
- Status last verified
- Oct 2024
- First submitted
- 16 Oct 2024
- Last updated
- 17 Oct 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Oct 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of Non-Incised Papillae Surgical Approach (NIPSA) Versus Conventional Flap in Periodontal Reconstructive Surgery of Intrabony Defects (Clinical and Radiographic Study)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06647186
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- A10020822
- Conditions
- Periodontal Bone Loss
- Keywords
- Periodontitis, Periodontal regeneration
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Bassant Hamdy MowafeyUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 12 Jun 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 20 Dec 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Sep 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Oct 2024 (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.
Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of Non-Incised Papillae Surgical Approach (NIPSA) versus conventional flap with mineralized Freeze-Dried Bone Allograft (FDBA) in periodontal reconstructive surgery of intrabony defects (Clinical and Radiographic study).
Patients and methods: Twenty patients with stage III/IV periodontitis with vertical intraosseous defect treated with NIPSA plus FDBA (n=10) or Conventional flap plus FDBA (n=10) were analysed. All patients met the same inclusion criteria and were treated following the same protocol, except for the surgical management of soft tissue (NIPSA versus Conventional flap). Clinical parameters were assessed at baseline, three months and sixmonths. Radiographic parameters were assessed at baseline and six months.
Detailed description
IPatients' selection: Twenty patients with periodontitis were diagnosed with vertical intra-osseous periodontal defects. They were selected from the Department of Oral Medicine and Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University putting into consideration certain inclusion and exclusion criteria. The patients have known all of the needed information about the treatment protocols and the materials they would receive. All possible risks and other treatment options had been reviewed and explained to the patients. The patients were cooperative and they understood this explanation. Written consent had been taken from each patient before performing any steps and approved from the ethical committee of our college
Inclusion criteria:
- Patients with stage III/IV periodontitis.
- Age Group between 30 to 50 years old.
- Active residual pockets (positive bleeding on probing) associated with intrabony defects.
- Periodontal lesions with probing depth (PD) ≥ 5 mm and extension of the intrabony defect ≥ 3 mm.
- Vertical intrabony periodontal defects, always involving the buccal aspect.
Exclusion criteria:
- Systemic disease contraindicating periodontal surgery.
- Smokers.
- Diabetic patients.
- Pregnant patients.
- Third molars or teeth with incorrect endodontic or restorative treatment.
Study Design:
This parallel randomized controlled clinical trial included twenty patients.
The patients selected were classified into two groups:
- Group 1 (Study group): Included ten patients with stage III/IV periodontitis and PD ≥ 5 mm. These patients undergone periodontal treatment using NIPSA procedure in addition to mineralized FDBA substitute for vertical intrabony defects regeneration.
- Group II (Control group): Included ten patients with stage III/IV periodontitis and PD ≥ 5 mm. These patients undergone periodontal treatment using conventional flap procedure in addition to mineralized FDBA substitute for vertical intrabony defects regeneration.
Clinical Periodontal Assessment:
The clinical assessment was performed for all patients at baseline, three and six months after periodontal treatment.
Plaque Index:
It was used to assess the amount of plaque at the gingival third of the tooth. Light source, dental mirrors, sharp dental explorers, periodontal probes and the dryness of the surface of the teeth and gingiva using air were used for scoring the plaque index. Therefore, only the plaque of the cervical third of the tooth was evaluated without regarding extension of the plaque on the middle and incisal thirds.
Gingival Bleeding Index:
The Gingival bleeding index was adopted by Ramfjord to measure the severity of gingivitis and its extension. Measurements of the index were taken from all surfaces of the teeth. A periodontal probe was used for recording the scores from four gingival areas of the tooth which were the distofacial papilla, facial gingival margins, mesiofacial papilla and entire lingual gingival margin of the tooth.
Probing Depth:
Probing depth was measured by special periodontal probe which was (UNC-15 probe). The index focused on how much the periodontal probe went deeper in the periodontal pockets and the reading was taken from the free gingival margin of tooth to the base of the pockets. Measurements were taken from different surfaces per each tooth.
Which were the distofacial surface, mid facial surface, mesiofacial surface, mesio-lingual surface, mid lingual surface and disto-lingual surfaces of the tooth. Adding the six scores per each tooth and dividing it by six gave the mean score for that tooth and to get the index score for the person; the scores for each tooth were added and then were divided by the number of all examined teeth.
Clinical Attachment Loss:
The CAL is the measurement of the distance from a fixed reference point (typically the cemento-enamel junction, CEJ) to the base of the periodontal pocket. It provides valuable information about the extent of attachment loss around teeth. A calibrated periodontal probe (UNC-15) was used to measure probing depth (PD) and calculate CAL. Insert the probe gently into the gingival sulcus or pocket, parallel to the long axis of the tooth, and record the depth from the CEJ to the base of the sulcus or pocket. Measure CAL at multiple sites (e.g., mesial, distal, buccal, lingual) around each tooth to account for variations in attachment loss.
Gingival Recession:
Gingival recession refers to the exposure of the tooth root surface due to the apical migration of the gingival margin. Therefore, gingival recession is associated with the destruction of both soft and hard tissue. It is an important clinical parameter to assess in periodontal evaluations. Gingival recession was measured from the CEJ to the current position of the gingival margin using (UNC-15 probe) inserted gently into the gingival sulcus or pocket, parallel to the long axis of the tooth.
Width of Keratinized Tissue:
Adequate width of keratinized tissue is associated with better periodontal health outcomes, including reduced risk of gingival recession and attachment loss. During periodontal surgeries, adequate keratinized tissue facilitates better wound healing and enhances the success of procedures like gingival grafting. Keratinized tissue width was measured using (UNC-15 probe) from the gingival margin to the mucogingival junction, at the mid-buccal point.
Location of the Tip of the Papilla:
Taking as a reference the central axis of the tooth, the distance from the CEJ in the zenith of the tooth to the vertex of the papilla. The manual UNC-15 probe was used to measure the distance.
Radiographic assessment:
Radiographic interpretation of the intrabony defect was done using CBCT at baseline and 6 months post-operatively. Landmarks were identified using CBCT including the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ), the alveolar crest (AC), the base of the defect (BD) and the depth of intrabony defect (ID).The depth of intrabony defect (ID) was measured as the difference between the distance from (CEJ) to (BD) and (CEJ) to (AC).
- Surgical Intervention:
Pre surgical phase:
Phase I therapy according to the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP); the S3 Level Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG). The first step in therapy was intended to remove supragingival calculus using ultrasonic scalers and guide behaviour change by encouraging the patient to increase the efficacy of oral hygiene (motivation, oral hygiene instructions) in the form of brushing, flossing, and mouthwash. Prescription of chlorhexidine mouth wash twice daily and the patient was scheduled for a follow-up appointment after 7 days.
The second step of therapy (cause-related therapy) was aimed at controlling (reducing/eliminating) the subgingival biofilm and calculus (subgingival instrumentation) with possible removal of root surface (cementum). Subgingival instrumentation was supplemented with the irrigation of chlorhexidine solution and systemic antibiotic (Metronidazole 500mg) twice daily for 5 days.
All patients were scheduled for a follow-up appointment 2 weeks after step 2 of therapy. The clinical periodontal assessment was re-evaluated to assess if therapy goals were achieved and to verify the eligibility for participating in the study before starting the surgical phase.
Surgical phase:
Group I (NIPSA):
After administration of local anesthesia, using blade number 15, a single horizontal or oblique incision was made in the mucosa located on the cortical bone tissue, apically at the edge of the bone crest that delimited the intrabony defect and as far as possible from the marginal tissues. The mesiodistal extension of the incision was sufficient to allow access to the defect, expose its limits, and allow correct debridement of the periodontal pocket and the application of biomaterials.
Tissue coronal to the incision was raised to full thickness from the incision line to expose the bone peaks delimiting the intrabony defect. In patients with lingual defect, we were able to has a lingual component, the area was accessed using buccal access. The granulation tissue was removed from the bone walls of the defect. Dental plaque and calculus deposits were removed from the root surface with ultrasonic scaler tips and micro-minicurettes.
Group II (Conventional flap):
After administration of local anesthesia, using blade number 15, intrasulcular incision was made splitting the buccal papilla from the palatal papilla. All defects were approached by elevating a flap only on the buccal side and leaving the oral portion of the interdental supracrestal soft tissues undetached. The full-thickness elevation of the marginal portion of the flap was performed with a microsurgical periosteal elevator.
After removal of granulation tissue from the bone walls of the defect, root and defect debridement was performed with manual and mechanical (ultrasonic) instruments with tips for subgingival instrumentation.
Application of bone graft material:
A solution of 24% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) was applied to the root surface in all the patients in the two groups, and after 2 min, irrigation with abundant saline solution then allograft bone material; mineralized (FDBA) spongy powder crushed bone preparation of natural cadaver (cadaveric origin) was mixed with sterile saline solution together to produce stable viscous bone graft material then packed into the periodontal defect during surgery.
Suturing technique: NIPSA group: The incision was sutured with a double suture line; the first line with horizontal internal mattress sutures to approximate the connective tissue of the mucosal edges of the incision. The second line with simple interrupted sutures, interrupted sutures help to bring the wound edges together counterbalancing the eversion caused by the horizontal mattress sutures. Conventional group: The incision was sutured with simple interrupted sutures.
Post-operative instructions: All patients received Amoxicillin (Augmentin) 1000 mg every 12h for 5 days. Postoperative pain and inflammation were controlled using ibuprofen (Brufen) 600 mg (or acetaminophen (Doliprane) 1000mg in patients allergic to ibuprofen). Patients rinsed with 0.2% chlorhexidine hydrochloride (Orovex) twice daily for 1 week, without mechanical hygiene on the surgical area.
Statistical analysis of the data Data were fed to the computer and analysed using IBM SPSS software package version 20.0. (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp) Qualitative data were described using number and percent. Shapiro-Wilk test was used to verify the normality of distribution. Quantitative data were described using range (minimum and maximum), mean, standard deviation, median and interquartile range (IQR). Significance of the obtained results was judged at the 5% level.
The used tests were
- - Chi-square test For categorical variables, to compare different groups.
- - Student t-test For normally distributed quantitative variables, to compare between two studied groups.
- - Paired t-test For normally distributed quantitative variables, to compare between two periods.
- - ANOVA with repeated measures For normally distributed quantitative variables, to compare between more than two periods or stages and Post Hoc Test (adjusted Bonferron) for pairwise comparisons.
- - Mann Whitney test For abnormally distributed quantitative variables, to compare between two studied groups.
- - Friedman test For abnormally distributed quantitative variables, to compare between more than two periods or stages and Post Hoc Test (Dunn's) for pairwise comparisons.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Study group | Active comparator | Procedure: Non Incised Papillae Surgical ApproachTen patients treated with Non-Incised Papillae Surgical Approach (NIPSA) plus Allograft bone substitute |
| Control group | Active comparator | Procedure: Conventional flap designTen patients treated with Conventional Flap plus Allograft bone substitute |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 30 to 50 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patients with stage III/IV periodontitis.
- Age Group between 30 to 50 years old.
- Active residual pockets (positive bleeding on probing) associated with intrabony defects.
- Periodontal lesions with probing depth (PD) ≥ 5 mm and extension of the intrabony defect ≥ 3 mm.
- Vertical intrabony periodontal defects, always involving the buccal aspect.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Systemic disease contraindicating periodontal surgery.
- Smokers.
- Diabetic patients.
- Pregnant patients.
- Third molars or teeth with incorrect endodontic or restorative treatment.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Non Incised Papillae Surgical ApproachAlso: NIPSATen patients were included in this group, phase I therapy (scaling, root planing and oral hygiene measures) was performed. A single horizontal or oblique incision was made in the mucosa located on the cortical bone tissue, apical to the intrabony defect. The mesiodistal extension of the incision was sufficient to allow access to the defect. Tissue coronal to the incision was raised to full thickness from the incision line to expose the bone peaks delimiting the intrabony defect. The granulation tissue was removed from the bone walls of the defect. Dental plaque and calculus deposits were removed from the root surface with ultrasonic scaler tips and micro-minicurettes. A solution of 24% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) was applied to the root surface for 2 min, irrigation with saline solution then allograft bone material was packed into the periodontal defect. The incision was sutured with horizontal internal mattress sutures then simple interrupted sutures. | Procedure or surgery | Study group |
| Conventional flap designAlso: Single flap approachTen patients were included in this group, phase I therapy (scaling, root planing and oral hygiene measures) was performed. Intrasulcular incision was made splitting the buccal papilla from the palatal papilla. All defects were approached by elevating a flap only on the buccal side and leaving the oral portion of the interdental supracrestal soft tissues undetached. The full-thickness elevation of the marginal portion of the flap was performed with a microsurgical periosteal elevator. After removal of granulation tissue from the bone walls of the defect, root and defect debridement was performed with manual and mechanical (ultrasonic) instruments with tips for subgingival instrumentation. A solution of 24% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) was applied to the root surface for 2 min, irrigation with saline solution then allograft bone material was packed into the periodontal defect. The incision was sutured with simple interrupted sutures. | Procedure or surgery | Control group |
Primary outcome
Gingival Recession
Time frame: Three and six months
7 secondary outcomes
Location of the tip of the papilla
Time frame: Three and six months
Width of keratenized tissue
Time frame: Three and six months
Probing depth reduction
Time frame: Three and six months
Clinical attachment gain
Time frame: Three and six months
Plaque index
Time frame: Three and six months
Gingival bleeding index
Time frame: Three and six months
Bone gain
Time frame: Six 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 17 Oct 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Periodontal Bone Loss
Active, not recruiting
L-PRF Block vs Composite Graft for Horizontal Ridge Augmentation
Alveolar Ridge Resorption After Extraction, Alveolar Bone Loss
Active, not recruiting
Influence of Implant Insertion Depth on Peri-implant Bone Changes Around Short Implants
Tooth Loss, Edentulism
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
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.
Professor Una Mohamed ElShinnawi study chair
Faculty of Dentistry Mansoura University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Non Incised Papillae Surgical Approach and Conventional flap design in people with Periodontal Bone Loss, run by Bassant Hamdy Mowafey 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 5 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 17 Oct 2024. 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?
Gingival Recession (time frame: Three and six months). 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 17 Oct 2024.