CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04189718Updated Dec 6, 2019

Comparative Evaluation of Osseodensification Versus Conventional Implant Site

An interventional study of osseodensification protocol and conventional implant site preparation protocol in Bone Density and Implant Stability, sponsored by Krishnadevaraya College of Dental Sciences & Hospital. Completed at 1 site in India. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 75 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-12-06.

Sponsored by Krishnadevaraya College of Dental Sciences & Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 2 years after the study started (first participant enrolled Nov 2017, registered Dec 2019).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
22
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 75 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The present study is a human, prospective, randomised controlled clinical trial conducted to explore and compare the clinical and radiological outcome of Osseodensification protocol with conventional implant site preparation protocol. The trial is in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) criteria, 2010.

Read the detailed description

Twenty two dental implants were placed in twelve healthy individuals satisfying the inclusion and exclusion criteria were recruited for the study. A detailed, thorough medical and dental history was obtained and each patient was subjected to comprehensive clinical and radiological examination. All patients were informed about the nature of the study, the surgical procedure involved, potential benefits and risks associated with the surgical procedure and written informed consent were obtained from all patients.

All the patients received Norris implant. the implant site preparation technique being Osseodensification protocol for the test group and conventional implant site preparation protocol for the control group, eleven in each group. The clinical and radiographic parameters were recorded at baseline, immediate post implant placement, six months and twelve months postoperatively.

02

Conditions studied

  • Bone Density
  • Implant Stability

Keywords

  • hounsfield
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Krishnadevaraya College of Dental Sciences & Hospital is the lead sponsor of 51 studies on the registry; 13 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 75 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Single/multiple missing teeth in the maxillary anterior/posterior region.
  2. Bone density of D2 or D3 (Carl E.Misch).
  3. Patients between 18-75 years.
  4. Patients who demonstrate good plaque control (PI\<10%) and showing good compliance.
  5. Patients willing to participate in the study.

Exclusion Criteria:-

  1. Insufficient density or height of residual ridge.
  2. Patients with bleeding disorder or on anticoagulant therapy.
  3. Pregnant and lactating females.
  4. Patients with history of smoking.
  5. Use of systemic antibiotics in the past 3 months.
  6. Patients treated with any medication known to cause periodontal changes.
  7. Drug and alcohol abuse.
  8. Occlusal interferences.
  9. Patients with history of titanium allergy.
  10. Immunocompromised state and debilitating disease.
  11. Malignancy or radiotherapy/chemotherapy for malignancy.
  12. Systemic diseases that would negatively influence wound healing.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
22 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    osseodensification protocol

    Experimental: In the test group, osteotomy site preparation was performed using Osseodensification technique at 1100 rpm and implant was placed

    Procedure: osseodensification protocol · Procedure: conventional implant site preparation protocol

  • Active comparator
    conventional implant site preparation protocol

    Control: in the control group, osteotomy site was prepared using conventional drilling protocol at 1100 rpm and implant was placed.

    Procedure: osseodensification protocol · Procedure: conventional implant site preparation protocol

Interventions

  • Procedureosseodensification protocol

    Local anaesthesia was administered and mucoperiosteal flap was reflected. Implant osteotomies was performed with sequential drilling with osseodensification protocol at 1100 rpm. The pilot drill was used in clockwise direction and the other sequential drills were used in counter clockwise direction under copious irrigation. Flap closure was achieved using 3-0 silk sutures to protect the implant site.

    Also known as: Densah bur protocol, Osseodensification technique

  • Procedureconventional implant site preparation protocol

    Local anaesthesia was administered and mucoperiosteal flap was reflected. Implant osteotomies was performed with sequential drilling with conventional implant site preparation protocol at 1100 rpm. The pilot drill was used in clockwise direction and the other sequential drills were used in clockwise direction under copious irrigation. Flap closure was achieved using 3-0 silk sutures to protect the implant site.

    Also known as: standard drilling technique, regular drilling technique

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. primary implant stability

    the primary implant stability was measured during implant placement using Insertion Torque Value(ITV).

    Time frame: immediate post implant placement

  2. change from baseline in bone density

    A Multislice CT was used for scanning the implant site pre operatively, just after implant placement and 1 year post implant placement to measure the change in bone density. It was performed using a tube voltage of 120 kV(kilovolt) and a tube current of 40 mA(milliampere). The occlusal plane of the patient was set perpendicular to the floor base using ear rods. The axial images was reconstructed with 0.625 mm thick slices at 0.625 mm interval and a 1.75 mm field of view(FOV) image analysis software

    Time frame: 1 year

  3. change from baseline in crestal bone level

    Digital radiographs (radiovisiograph-RVG) were standardised using radiographic paralleling technique and positioning device and custom fabricated bite-block at baseline and follow up.Mesial and distal peri-implant radiographic bone level were recorded in millimetres on the digital radiographs using Digimiser image

    Time frame: 1 year

Secondary outcomes

  1. change from baseline in keratinized mucosa width

    The width of keratinized mucosa was measured from the mucosal margin to the mucogingival junction at the facial surface. The mucogingival junction location was determined using a visual method (Schiller's potassium iodide solution).

    Time frame: 1 year

  2. change from baseline in ridge width

    Soft tissue and hard tissue labio-lingual ridge width was measured at baseline, immediate post implant placement, 6 months and 1 year after implant placement using ridge mapping calipers/Multislice CT.

    Time frame: 1 year

  3. Patient reported pain evaluation (Visual Analog Scale)

    patient were asked to report the pain after the procedure in terms of visual analog scale (VAS) score in a rating between 1 to 10. There are 5-point verbal descriptive scale with an interval of 2("nil," "mild," "moderate," "severe," and "very severe") Patients were asked to rate their pain in a score between 1-10

    Time frame: 1 year

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Krishnadevaraya college of dental sciences
    Bangalore, Karnataka 562157, India
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Trisi P, Berardini M, Falco A, Podaliri Vulpiani M. New Osseodensification Implant Site Preparation Method to Increase Bone Density in Low-Density Bone: In Vivo Evaluation in Sheep. Implant Dent. 2016 Feb;25(1):24-31. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000358. PubMed 26584202 ↗
  • Lahens B, Neiva R, Tovar N, Alifarag AM, Jimbo R, Bonfante EA, Bowers MM, Cuppini M, Freitas H, Witek L, Coelho PG. Biomechanical and histologic basis of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implant placement in low density bone. An experimental study in sheep. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2016 Oct;63:56-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2016.06.007. Epub 2016 Jun 10. PubMed 27341291 ↗
  • Lahens B, Lopez CD, Neiva RF, Bowers MM, Jimbo R, Bonfante EA, Morcos J, Witek L, Tovar N, Coelho PG. The effect of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implants with different surface treatments: A study in sheep. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2019 Apr;107(3):615-623. doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.34154. Epub 2018 Aug 6. PubMed 30080320 ↗
  • Witek L, Neiva R, Alifarag A, Shahraki F, Sayah G, Tovar N, Lopez CD, Gil L, Coelho PG. Absence of Healing Impairment in Osteotomies Prepared via Osseodensification Drilling. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2019 Jan/Feb;39(1):65-71. doi: 10.11607/prd.3504. PubMed 30543729 ↗
  • Witek L, Alifarag AM, Tovar N, Lopez CD, Gil LF, Gorbonosov M, Hannan K, Neiva R, Coelho PG. Osteogenic parameters surrounding trabecular tantalum metal implants in osteotomies prepared via osseodensification drilling. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2019 Nov 1;24(6):e764-e769. doi: 10.4317/medoral.23108. PubMed 31655837 ↗
  • Alifarag AM, Lopez CD, Neiva RF, Tovar N, Witek L, Coelho PG. Atemporal osseointegration: Early biomechanical stability through osseodensification. J Orthop Res. 2018 Sep;36(9):2516-2523. doi: 10.1002/jor.23893. Epub 2018 Mar 30. PubMed 29537128 ↗
  • Tian JH, Neiva R, Coelho PG, Witek L, Tovar NM, Lo IC, Gil LF, Torroni A. Alveolar Ridge Expansion: Comparison of Osseodensification and Conventional Osteotome Techniques. J Craniofac Surg. 2019 Mar/Apr;30(2):607-610. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000004956. PubMed 30507887 ↗
  • Lopez CD, Alifarag AM, Torroni A, Tovar N, Diaz-Siso JR, Witek L, Rodriguez ED, Coelho PG. Osseodensification for enhancement of spinal surgical hardware fixation. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2017 May;69:275-281. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.01.020. Epub 2017 Jan 13. PubMed 28113132 ↗
  • Huwais S, Meyer EG. A Novel Osseous Densification Approach in Implant Osteotomy Preparation to Increase Biomechanical Primary Stability, Bone Mineral Density, and Bone-to-Implant Contact. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017 Jan/Feb;32(1):27-36. doi: 10.11607/jomi.4817. Epub 2016 Oct 14. PubMed 27741329 ↗
  • Stavropoulos A, Cochran D, Obrecht M, Pippenger BE, Dard M. Effect of Osteotomy Preparation on Osseointegration of Immediately Loaded, Tapered Dental Implants. Adv Dent Res. 2016 Mar;28(1):34-41. doi: 10.1177/0022034515624446. PubMed 26927486 ↗
  • Almutairi AS, Walid MA, Alkhodary MA. The effect of osseodensification and different thread designs on the dental implant primary stability. F1000Res. 2018 Dec 5;7:1898. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.17292.1. eCollection 2018. PubMed 31131085 ↗
  • Oliveira PGFP, Bergamo ETP, Neiva R, Bonfante EA, Witek L, Tovar N, Coelho PG. Osseodensification outperforms conventional implant subtractive instrumentation: A study in sheep. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2018 Sep 1;90:300-307. doi: 10.1016/j.msec.2018.04.051. Epub 2018 Apr 18. No abstract available. PubMed 29853095 ↗
  • Trisi P, Berardini M, Falco A, Podaliri Vulpiani M. Validation of value of actual micromotion as a direct measure of implant micromobility after healing (secondary implant stability). An in vivo histologic and biomechanical study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Nov;27(11):1423-1430. doi: 10.1111/clr.12756. Epub 2016 Jan 4. PubMed 26727557 ↗
  • Falco A, Berardini M, Trisi P. Correlation Between Implant Geometry, Implant Surface, Insertion Torque, and Primary Stability: In Vitro Biomechanical Analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018 Jul/Aug;33(4):824-830. doi: 10.11607/jomi.6285. PubMed 30024998 ↗
  • Slete FB, Olin P, Prasad H. Histomorphometric Comparison of 3 Osteotomy Techniques. Implant Dent. 2018 Aug;27(4):424-428. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000767. PubMed 29762184 ↗
  • Cappare P, Vinci R, Di Stefano DA, Traini T, Pantaleo G, Gherlone EF, Gastaldi G. Correlation between Initial BIC and the Insertion Torque/Depth Integral Recorded with an Instantaneous Torque-Measuring Implant Motor: An in vivo Study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Oct;17 Suppl 2:e613-20. doi: 10.1111/cid.12294. Epub 2015 Apr 15. PubMed 25876078 ↗
  • Alghamdi H, Anand PS, Anil S. Undersized implant site preparation to enhance primary implant stability in poor bone density: a prospective clinical study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011 Dec;69(12):e506-12. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2011.08.007. PubMed 22117707 ↗
  • Markovic A, Calvo-Guirado JL, Lazic Z, Gomez-Moreno G, Calasan D, Guardia J, Colic S, Aguilar-Salvatierra A, Gacic B, Delgado-Ruiz R, Janjic B, Misic T. Evaluation of primary stability of self-tapping and non-self-tapping dental implants. A 12-week clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2013 Jun;15(3):341-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00415.x. Epub 2011 Dec 15. PubMed 22171668 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 6, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04189718
Lead sponsor
Krishnadevaraya College of Dental Sciences & Hospital
Responsible party
Dr Prabhuji MLV (Professor, Krishnadevaraya College of Dental Sciences & Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Dec 6, 2019
Start date
Nov 30, 2017
Primary completion
Oct 15, 2019
Completion
Oct 30, 2019
Last update
Dec 6, 2019

Study contacts

PRIYANKA ACHARYA, mds
principal investigator · Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences
prabhuji mlv, mds
study director · Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion