Infected Extraction SocketsNCT07753044
Photoactivated Disinfection Versus Laser Disinfection of Infected Sockets on the Success of Immediate Implant Placement
A study testing Photoactivated disinfection, Er,Cr:YSGG laser disinfection and Chlorohexidine disinfection in people with Infected Extraction Sockets, run by Alexandria University at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
Background: Dental implantology offers reliable tooth replacement options, but infections in extraction sockets can compromise osseointegration. Conventional disinfection methods, such as chlorhexidine, often fail to completely eliminate pathogenic microorganisms and may impair tissue healing. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 20 to 60 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Infected Extraction Sockets
- What is being tested?
- Photoactivated disinfection, Er,Cr:YSGG laser disinfection and Chlorohexidine disinfection
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 9 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 10 Jun 2025to 3 Feb 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 20 to 60 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients having posterior tooth/teeth indicated for extraction
- Patients must exhibit radiographic evidence of infection, defined as chronic periapical pathology (radiolucency)
- The extraction site should have intact surrounding alveolar bone
- There must be at least 2 mm of sound bone beyond the root apex
- Patients must be in overall good health and free from uncontrolled systemic conditions
Who cannot join
- History of radiation therapy in the head and neck region
- Pregnant or lactating women
- Patients on long-term antibiotic therapy, as it could influence the outcomes
- Heavy Smoking: More than 10-15 cigarettes per day.
- Significant bruxism or parafunctional habits affecting implant stability.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Egypt1 site
Outpatient Clinic of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
Alexandria, Azarita, 00203
About this study
Official title: Effect of Photoactivated Disinfection Versus Laser Disinfection of Infected Sockets on the Success of Immediate Implant Placement (a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial)
Background: Dental implantology offers reliable tooth replacement options, but infections in extraction sockets can compromise osseointegration. Conventional disinfection methods, such as chlorhexidine, often fail to completely eliminate pathogenic microorganisms and may impair tissue healing. Photoactivated disinfection (PAD) and laser disinfection have emerged as promising alternatives. PAD employs a light-activated photosensitizer to generate reactive oxygen species (ROS), effectively disrupting bacterial membranes while preserving host cell viability. In parallel, laser disinfection utilizes focused light energy to eliminate bacterial biofilms and contaminated tissue with minimal thermal damage. In this study, we specifically utilize the Er,Cr:YSGG laser, which operates at a water-absorbing wavelength to induce micro-explosions that mechanically disrupt biofilms and promote a cleaner socket environment for improved osseointegration. Aim of the study: To compare the effectiveness of photoactivated disinfection (PAD), Er,Cr:YSGG laser disinfection, and conventional disinfection with chlorhexidine in decontaminating infected extraction sockets prior to immediate implant placement, promoting bone healing, and improving the osseointegration and stability of immediate implants placed in infected extraction sockets.
- Conditions
- Infected Extraction Sockets
- Being tested
- Photoactivated disinfection, Er,Cr:YSGG laser disinfection, Chlorohexidine disinfection
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Photoactivated disinfectionOther
Standard treatment + Toluidine blue + Light activation + Immediate implant placement
Er,Cr:YSGG laser disinfectionOther
Standard treatment + Er,Cr:YSGG laser application + Immediate Implant placement
Chlorohexidine disinfectionOther
Standard treatment + Chlorohexidine Irrigation + Immediate Implant placement
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| PAD | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: Photoactivated disinfection |
| Er,Cr:YSGG laser Group | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: Er,Cr:YSGG laser disinfection |
| Conventional group | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Other: Chlorohexidine disinfection |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
implant stability
Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA) using Osstell ISQ: Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) values will be recorded at 6 months after implant placement. Values from 1 to 100, the higher the ISQ, the higher the stability of the implant.
Measured: 6 months
change in bone density
Bone density assessment using radiographs immediately post-operative and at 6 months.
Measured: baseline and 6 months
change in marginal bone loss
Marginal Bone Loss (MBL) assessment using radiographs immediately postoperative and at 6 months.
Measured: baseline and 6 months
Secondary outcomes (2)
change in pain scores
Post-operative pain will be assessed through a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS). (0-1 = No pain, 2-4 = mild pain, 5-7 = moderate pain, 8-10 = severe pain).
Measured: up to 7 days
change in post-operative edema
Post-operative edema will be assessed as follows None (no swelling), Mild (intra oral swelling confined to surgical field), Moderate (extra oral swelling in the surgical zone), Severe (extra oral swelling spreading beyond the surgical zone)
Measured: up to 7 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted7 Aug 2026
- Study start10 Jun 2025
- Primary completion3 Feb 2026
- Study completion3 Feb 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Infected Extraction SocketsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Alexandria 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
- 9 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Alexandria University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07753044
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1044-03/2025
- Status last verified
- Aug 2026
- First submitted
- 4 Aug 2026
- Last updated
- 7 Aug 2026
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 Aug 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effect of Photoactivated Disinfection Versus Laser Disinfection of Infected Sockets on the Success of Immediate Implant Placement (a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07753044
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 1044-03/2025
- Conditions
- Infected Extraction Sockets
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 9 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Alexandria UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 10 Jun 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 3 Feb 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 3 Feb 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 7 Aug 2026 (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: Dental implantology offers reliable tooth replacement options, but infections in extraction sockets can compromise osseointegration. Conventional disinfection methods, such as chlorhexidine, often fail to completely eliminate pathogenic microorganisms and may impair tissue healing. Photoactivated disinfection (PAD) and laser disinfection have emerged as promising alternatives. PAD employs a light-activated photosensitizer to generate reactive oxygen species (ROS), effectively disrupting bacterial membranes while preserving host cell viability. In parallel, laser disinfection utilizes focused light energy to eliminate bacterial biofilms and contaminated tissue with minimal thermal damage. In this study, we specifically utilize the Er,Cr:YSGG laser, which operates at a water-absorbing wavelength to induce micro-explosions that mechanically disrupt biofilms and promote a cleaner socket environment for improved osseointegration. Aim of the study: To compare the effectiveness of photoactivated disinfection (PAD), Er,Cr:YSGG laser disinfection, and conventional disinfection with chlorhexidine in decontaminating infected extraction sockets prior to immediate implant placement, promoting bone healing, and improving the osseointegration and stability of immediate implants placed in infected extraction sockets.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| PAD | Experimental | Other: Photoactivated disinfection |
| Er,Cr:YSGG laser Group | Experimental | Other: Er,Cr:YSGG laser disinfection |
| Conventional group | Active comparator | Other: Chlorohexidine disinfection |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 20 to 60 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patients having posterior tooth/teeth indicated for extraction
- Patients must exhibit radiographic evidence of infection, defined as chronic periapical pathology (radiolucency)
- The extraction site should have intact surrounding alveolar bone
- There must be at least 2 mm of sound bone beyond the root apex
- Patients must be in overall good health and free from uncontrolled systemic conditions
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- History of radiation therapy in the head and neck region
- Pregnant or lactating women
- Patients on long-term antibiotic therapy, as it could influence the outcomes
- Heavy Smoking: More than 10-15 cigarettes per day.
- Significant bruxism or parafunctional habits affecting implant stability.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Photoactivated disinfectionStandard treatment + Toluidine blue + Light activation + Immediate implant placement | Other | PAD |
| Er,Cr:YSGG laser disinfectionStandard treatment + Er,Cr:YSGG laser application + Immediate Implant placement | Other | Er,Cr:YSGG laser Group |
| Chlorohexidine disinfectionStandard treatment + Chlorohexidine Irrigation + Immediate Implant placement | Other | Conventional group |
Primary outcome
implant stability
Time frame: 6 months
Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA) using Osstell ISQ: Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) values will be recorded at 6 months after implant placement. Values from 1 to 100, the higher the ISQ, the higher the stability of the implant.
change in bone density
Time frame: baseline and 6 months
Bone density assessment using radiographs immediately post-operative and at 6 months.
change in marginal bone loss
Time frame: baseline and 6 months
Marginal Bone Loss (MBL) assessment using radiographs immediately postoperative and at 6 months.
2 secondary outcomes
change in pain scores
Time frame: up to 7 days
change in post-operative edema
Time frame: up to 7 days
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 7 Aug 2026.
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Photoactivated disinfection, Er,Cr:YSGG laser disinfection and Chlorohexidine disinfection in people with Infected Extraction Sockets, run by Alexandria University at 1 site in Egypt.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 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 7 Aug 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Egypt. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
implant stability (time frame: 6 months). The study lists 3 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 7 Aug 2026.