Augmentation, Alveolar RidgeNCT06889558
Evaluation of the Bone Volume in Horizontal Atrophic Ridges Augmentation Using Tenting Grafting Technique Versus Khoury Technique in Mandibular Molar and Premolar Region: Randomized Clinical Trial
A study testing tenting titanium technique and tenting titanium screw in people with Augmentation, Alveolar Ridge, run by Cairo University.
Trial summary
The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the Tenting Grafting Technique and the Khoury Technique for horizontal augmentation of atrophic alveolar ridges in mandibular molar and premolar regions in dental implant procedures. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Augmentation, Alveolar Ridge
- What is being tested?
- tenting titanium technique and tenting titanium screw
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Apr 2025to Nov 2025
- 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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age ≥ 18 years.
- Both sexes.
- Cooperative and likely to maintain good dental health.
- Adequate bone height for placement of implants with a minimum length of 10 mm.
- Totally or partially edentulous alveolar ridges.
- Placement Patients with insufficient bone for an implant.
Who cannot join
- Presence of any local or systemic factors that might contraindicate oral surgery.
- Poor oral hygiene. Conditions that complicate wound healing such as uncontrolled diabetes, smoking (10 cigarettes a day), pregnancy, a history of drug or alcohol abuse, and an inability or unwillingness to return for follow ups after occlusal loading
- Pathological lesions in the defect site.
- Patients with habits that may jeopardize the implant longevity and affect the results of the study such as alcoholism or para-functional habits.
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Ahmed Mohamed Yousef contact
About this study
The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the Tenting Grafting Technique and the Khoury Technique for horizontal augmentation of atrophic alveolar ridges in mandibular molar and premolar regions in dental implant procedures.
Hypothesis:
We hypothesis that the tenting grafting technique is more effective for augmenting atrophic ridges with horizontal bone deficiency, whereas the Khoury technique will yield superior results for severely atrophic ridges, where both vertical and horizontal bone augmentation is required.
Read the detailed description
II. Introduction:
- Background and rationale:
Research question:
Would the tenting grafting technique result better in horizontal bone augmentation outcomes compared to the Khoury technique for atrophic ridges in dental implant procedures?
Statement of the problem:
Bone augmentation techniques are required in order to improve esthetic outcomes and long-term prognoses for dental implant treatment. These techniques involve the use of bone graft materials for the rehabilitation of deficient regions (Goudarzimoghaddam et al., 2024).
Atrophic ridges, which result from significant bone loss due to tooth extraction or long-term edentulism. The lack of sufficient bone volume can compromise the ability to place dental implants successfully, leading to poor functional and aesthetic outcomes.
However, there is a lack of consensus on which technique provides superior results in terms of bone regeneration, implant stability, complication rates, and overall patient satisfaction. Furthermore, the healing time, risk of complications, and long-term success of these techniques remain subjects of debate.
Rationale for conducting the research:
Tooth loss is accompanied by a series of adaptive changes, leading to dimensional alterations of the alveolar process. During the first year after tooth extraction, Schropp et al. described 50% bone loss in the buccal-lingual dimension, with 30% of the initial ridge width lost during the first 3 months (Hares et al., 2021).
Atrophic ridges present significant challenges in dental implantology, particularly when there is insufficient bone volume for the proper placement of implants. Ridge augmentation techniques become essential to restore the lost bone and ensure a stable foundation for implants (Goudarzimoghaddam et al., 2024). Bone augmentation techniques are required in order to improve esthetic outcomes and long-term prognoses for dental implant treatment. These techniques involve the use of bone graft materials for the rehabilitation of deficient regions (Işık et al., 2021).
Bone graft materials originating from human, animal, or synthetic sources are placed to induce osteoblastic activity of the bone and periosteal tissue, or to provide an osteoconductive scaffold that indirectly accelerates bone regeneration. These materials are manufactured in block or particulate forms to allow them to adapt to different bone defects (César Neto et al., 2020).
While the block forms have good mechanical properties, the particulate forms can have some disadvantages in reconstructing alveolar bone deficiencies, namely soft tissue migration, lack of structural integrity, which affects stability and also the collapse of the bone graft materials. Two of the commonly used methods for augmenting atrophic ridges are the tenting grafting technique and the Khoury technique (Abo Zekry et al., 2024) .
In the last decade, "tent-pole" techniques have been introduced to prevent the contraction of soft tissue around the bone graft material and to reduce micromovement or physiological resorption of the grafts. These techniques are a relatively newer and innovative method, create a space between the bone and periosteum for particulate grafts and provide ample bone volume. It is primarily used for horizontal bone augmentation, particularly in cases where the ridge is severely resorbed, making it difficult to place implants without bone grafting. This technique involves the use of a tenting screw or titanium mesh, which acts as a "tent" to support the bone graft material and prevent its collapse (Hares et al., 2021).
Within the wide range of different augmentation procedures, guided bone regeneration (GBR) and the use of autogenous bone blocks are the most common interventions in bone augmentation; Khoury et al. is a well-established method for augmenting atrophic bone ridges, described the stabilization of two split autologous bone blocks by microscrews and filling the generated gap with autogenous bone chips. These split bone blocks are obtained, either from the mandibular symphysis or ramus, using piezoelectric surgery or microsaws, obtaining a block that will later be divided into the two final thin laminae (Urban et al., 2023).
However, there is a lack of consensus on which technique provides superior results in terms of bone regeneration, implant stability, complication rates, and overall patient satisfaction. Hence, this study aims to evaluate atrophic ridges augmentation using tenting grafting technique versus Khoury technique.
Explanation for choice of comparators:
Both techniques are commonly employed in clinical practice for augmenting atrophic bone ridges, particularly when there is insufficient bone volume for dental implant placement. Comparing them provides meaningful insights into which method might offer better outcomes for patients with these common challenges.
- Objectives: The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the Tenting Grafting Technique and the Khoury Technique for horizontal augmentation of atrophic alveolar ridges in dental implant procedures.
Hypothesis:
We hypothesis that the tenting grafting technique is more effective for augmenting atrophic ridges with horizontal bone deficiency, whereas the Khoury technique will yield superior results for severely atrophic ridges, where both vertical and horizontal bone augmentation is required.
- Trial design:
- Randomized clinical trial.
- Parallel group study.
- Allocation ratio 1:1.
- Conditions
- Augmentation, Alveolar Ridge
- Being tested
- tenting titanium technique, tenting titanium screw
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
tenting titanium techniqueProcedure or surgery
Also called tenting screw
technique used to increase bone augmentation and increase bone volume
tenting titanium screwProcedure or surgery
technique used for increase bone voliume
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Khoury technique | Active comparator | technique use for bone augmentation in atrophic ridges Receives: Procedure: tenting titanium screw |
| tenting technique | Experimental | technique used for increase bone volume Receives: Procedure: tenting titanium technique |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Horizontal bone gain and volume by CBCT
measurement of bone volume by CBCT in cubic centimeter ( cc3 )
Measured: baseline
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Mar 2025
- Study startApr 2025 (estimated)
- Primary completionOct 2025 (estimated)
- Study completionNov 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Augmentation, Alveolar RidgeStudies 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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Cairo University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, ABDULRAHMAN RAJAB KHALLEEFAH, Cairo University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06889558
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- dental Tenting Graft technique
- Status last verified
- Mar 2025
- First submitted
- 16 Mar 2025
- Last updated
- 21 Mar 2025
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
De Angelis P, Cavalcanti C, Manicone PF, Liguori MG, Rella E, De Rosa G, Palmieri A, D'Addona A. A Comparison of Guided Bone Regeneration vs. the Shell Technique Using Xenogeneic Bone Blocks in Horizontal Bone Defects: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Dent J (Basel). 2024 May 9;12(5):137. doi: 10.3390/dj12050137.
PubMed 38786535
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Mar 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of the Bone Volume in Horizontal Atrophic Ridges Augmentation Using Tenting Grafting Technique Versus Khoury Technique in Mandibular Molar and Premolar Region: Randomized Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06889558
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- dental Tenting Graft technique
- Conditions
- Augmentation, Alveolar Ridge
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Cairo UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Apr 2025 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Oct 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Nov 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 21 Mar 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.
The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the Tenting Grafting Technique and the Khoury Technique for horizontal augmentation of atrophic alveolar ridges in mandibular molar and premolar regions in dental implant procedures.
Hypothesis:
We hypothesis that the tenting grafting technique is more effective for augmenting atrophic ridges with horizontal bone deficiency, whereas the Khoury technique will yield superior results for severely atrophic ridges, where both vertical and horizontal bone augmentation is required.
Detailed description
II. Introduction:
- Background and rationale:
Research question:
Would the tenting grafting technique result better in horizontal bone augmentation outcomes compared to the Khoury technique for atrophic ridges in dental implant procedures?
Statement of the problem:
Bone augmentation techniques are required in order to improve esthetic outcomes and long-term prognoses for dental implant treatment. These techniques involve the use of bone graft materials for the rehabilitation of deficient regions (Goudarzimoghaddam et al., 2024).
Atrophic ridges, which result from significant bone loss due to tooth extraction or long-term edentulism. The lack of sufficient bone volume can compromise the ability to place dental implants successfully, leading to poor functional and aesthetic outcomes.
However, there is a lack of consensus on which technique provides superior results in terms of bone regeneration, implant stability, complication rates, and overall patient satisfaction. Furthermore, the healing time, risk of complications, and long-term success of these techniques remain subjects of debate.
Rationale for conducting the research:
Tooth loss is accompanied by a series of adaptive changes, leading to dimensional alterations of the alveolar process. During the first year after tooth extraction, Schropp et al. described 50% bone loss in the buccal-lingual dimension, with 30% of the initial ridge width lost during the first 3 months (Hares et al., 2021).
Atrophic ridges present significant challenges in dental implantology, particularly when there is insufficient bone volume for the proper placement of implants. Ridge augmentation techniques become essential to restore the lost bone and ensure a stable foundation for implants (Goudarzimoghaddam et al., 2024). Bone augmentation techniques are required in order to improve esthetic outcomes and long-term prognoses for dental implant treatment. These techniques involve the use of bone graft materials for the rehabilitation of deficient regions (Işık et al., 2021).
Bone graft materials originating from human, animal, or synthetic sources are placed to induce osteoblastic activity of the bone and periosteal tissue, or to provide an osteoconductive scaffold that indirectly accelerates bone regeneration. These materials are manufactured in block or particulate forms to allow them to adapt to different bone defects (César Neto et al., 2020).
While the block forms have good mechanical properties, the particulate forms can have some disadvantages in reconstructing alveolar bone deficiencies, namely soft tissue migration, lack of structural integrity, which affects stability and also the collapse of the bone graft materials. Two of the commonly used methods for augmenting atrophic ridges are the tenting grafting technique and the Khoury technique (Abo Zekry et al., 2024) .
In the last decade, "tent-pole" techniques have been introduced to prevent the contraction of soft tissue around the bone graft material and to reduce micromovement or physiological resorption of the grafts. These techniques are a relatively newer and innovative method, create a space between the bone and periosteum for particulate grafts and provide ample bone volume. It is primarily used for horizontal bone augmentation, particularly in cases where the ridge is severely resorbed, making it difficult to place implants without bone grafting. This technique involves the use of a tenting screw or titanium mesh, which acts as a "tent" to support the bone graft material and prevent its collapse (Hares et al., 2021).
Within the wide range of different augmentation procedures, guided bone regeneration (GBR) and the use of autogenous bone blocks are the most common interventions in bone augmentation; Khoury et al. is a well-established method for augmenting atrophic bone ridges, described the stabilization of two split autologous bone blocks by microscrews and filling the generated gap with autogenous bone chips. These split bone blocks are obtained, either from the mandibular symphysis or ramus, using piezoelectric surgery or microsaws, obtaining a block that will later be divided into the two final thin laminae (Urban et al., 2023).
However, there is a lack of consensus on which technique provides superior results in terms of bone regeneration, implant stability, complication rates, and overall patient satisfaction. Hence, this study aims to evaluate atrophic ridges augmentation using tenting grafting technique versus Khoury technique.
Explanation for choice of comparators:
Both techniques are commonly employed in clinical practice for augmenting atrophic bone ridges, particularly when there is insufficient bone volume for dental implant placement. Comparing them provides meaningful insights into which method might offer better outcomes for patients with these common challenges.
- Objectives: The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the Tenting Grafting Technique and the Khoury Technique for horizontal augmentation of atrophic alveolar ridges in dental implant procedures.
Hypothesis:
We hypothesis that the tenting grafting technique is more effective for augmenting atrophic ridges with horizontal bone deficiency, whereas the Khoury technique will yield superior results for severely atrophic ridges, where both vertical and horizontal bone augmentation is required.
- Trial design:
- Randomized clinical trial.
- Parallel group study.
- Allocation ratio 1:1.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Khoury technique | Active comparator | Procedure: tenting titanium screwtechnique use for bone augmentation in atrophic ridges |
| tenting technique | Experimental | Procedure: tenting titanium techniquetechnique used for increase bone volume |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Age ≥ 18 years.
- Both sexes.
- Cooperative and likely to maintain good dental health.
- Adequate bone height for placement of implants with a minimum length of 10 mm.
- Totally or partially edentulous alveolar ridges.
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Presence of any local or systemic factors that might contraindicate oral surgery.
- Poor oral hygiene. Conditions that complicate wound healing such as uncontrolled diabetes, smoking (10 cigarettes a day), pregnancy, a history of drug or alcohol abuse, and an inability or unwillingness to return for follow ups after occlusal loading
- Pathological lesions in the defect site.
- Patients with habits that may jeopardize the implant longevity and affect the results of the study such as alcoholism or para-functional habits.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| tenting titanium techniqueAlso: tenting screwtechnique used to increase bone augmentation and increase bone volume | Procedure or surgery | tenting technique |
| tenting titanium screwtechnique used for increase bone voliume | Procedure or surgery | Khoury technique |
Primary outcome
Horizontal bone gain and volume by CBCT
Time frame: baseline
measurement of bone volume by CBCT in cubic centimeter ( cc3 )
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Mar 2025.
- Results publication: PubMed 38786535De Angelis P, Cavalcanti C, Manicone PF, Liguori MG, Rella E, De Rosa G, Palmieri A, D'Addona A. A Comparison of Guided Bone Regeneration vs. the Shell Technique Using Xenogeneic Bone Blocks in Horizontal Bone Defects: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Dent J (Basel). 2024 May 9;12(5):137. doi: 10.3390/dj12050137.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Augmentation, Alveolar Ridge
Active, not recruiting
L-PRF Block vs Composite Graft for Horizontal Ridge Augmentation
Alveolar Ridge Resorption After Extraction, Alveolar Bone Loss
Recruiting
Two Bovine Xenografts in Lateral Window Sinus Augmentation With or Without Bone Marrow Blood
Alveolar Bone Loss, Sinus Floor Augmentation
Not yet recruiting
Autogenous and Xenograft Bone Mix in Alveolar Ridge Reconstruction
Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Deficiency
Not yet recruiting
Comparison of Three Autogenous Bone and Xenograft Ratios for Horizontal Ridge Augmentation
Horizontal Alveolar Ridge Deficiency
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
Alveolar Ridge Preservation (ARP) Study Using Alloplastic Biomaterial and a Resorbable Synthetic Membrane. A Digital Workflow (CBCT/Scanner) Evaluates Hard and Soft Tissue Volumetric Changes at 4 Months, Validating Support for the Gingival Phenotype and Buccal Bone Plate.
Alveolar Ridge Augmentation, Bone Substitutes
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.
Ahmed Mohamed Yousef contact
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing tenting titanium technique and tenting titanium screw in people with Augmentation, Alveolar Ridge, run by Cairo University.
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 6 inclusion and 4 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 21 Mar 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
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 ABDULRAHMAN rajab Masoud (00218917232565, abdulrahman.rajab@dentistry.cu.edu.eg), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Horizontal bone gain and volume by CBCT (time frame: baseline). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06889558, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 21 Mar 2025.