CClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT06558812Updated Aug 19, 2024

Evaluation of the Success Rate of Prefabricated Versus Conventional Band and Loop Space Maintainers in Children With Prematurely Lost First Primary Molars

An interventional study of prefabricated space maintainer and conventional space maintainer in Premature Tooth Exfoliation, sponsored by Cairo University. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 4 Years to 6 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-08-19.

Sponsored by Cairo University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Sep 2025, 1 year 1 month ago, but the record still lists the study as not yet recruiting.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
50
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
4 Years to 6 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

To assess the clinical efficacy of prefabricated space maintainers compared to conventional ones, focusing on preserving the integrity of each component of bands and loops, avoidance of soft tissue impingement as well as preservation of arch dimensions.

Read the detailed description

Management of the developing occlusion lies firmly within the scope of pediatric dentistry, therefore protection of dental arch integrity and inter-arch relations in the premature loss of teeth can be guaranteed by placing space maintainers. Conventional appliances are used successfully as space maintainers, although they have some disadvantages.The need for at least two visits to delivery, therefore cannot be planned in patients under general anesthesia. Fabrication of conventional and loop requires an alginate impression and laboratory work.

Prefabricated band and loop devices have been introduced to dentistry in recent times. They can possibly overcome most of the previously mentioned limitations of conventional space maintainers. The prefabricated band and loop space maintainer is adjusted and applied in one visit and therefore can be planned in patients under general anesthesia. Other advantages include less time, more patient and parent satisfaction, and no laboratory work

02

Conditions studied

  • Premature Tooth Exfoliation
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Cairo University is the lead sponsor of 4,780 studies on the registry; 1,427 are open to participants now.

Of its 36 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 5 (14%) have results posted.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
4 Years to 6 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Clinical criteria Medically free children.

    • Patient and parent showing cooperation and compliance.
    • Patients having mandibular first deciduous molar indicated for extraction due to extensive coronal caries beyond possible repair, root caries and/or failed pulp therapy.
    • Freshly extracted single molars unilaterally or bilaterally
    • Unilateral or bilateral loss of primary molars before or after the eruption of the first permanent molar
    • Caries free or restored the mandibular second primary molars and deciduous canines in the side of the extraction maintained throughout the entire follow-up period.

Radiographic criteria

  • Presence of succedaneous tooth bud.
  • Presence of at least 1 mm bone overlying the succedaneous tooth germ
  • 1/3 to less than 2/3 of the root of the permanent successor is formed to the prematurely lost primary molars.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

    • Children with any parafunctional habits.

      • Children with previous allergies to stainless steel.
      • Permanent successors with 2/3 of its roots formed and space analysis does not indicate the fabrication of space maintainer.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
50 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Other
    conventional space maintainer

    Conventional band and loops have been widely used with a high rate of success as the most practical way of space maintenance, as reported in numerous articles . Band and loop space maintainer is used to maintain space for successors of early lost primary molars. This is due to the ease and practicality of fabrication, adjustments and repairs of this space maintainer, as well as its ability to continue to function until the eruption of the permanent successor without interfering with their eruption The need for at least two visits to delivery, therefore cannot be planned in patients under general anesthesia. Fabrication of conventional and loop requires an alginate impression and laboratory work.

    Device: conventional space maintainer

  • Other
    prefabricated space maintainer

    Prefabricated band and loop devices have been introduced to dentistry in recent times. They can possibly overcome most of the previously mentioned limitations of conventional space maintainers. The prefabricated band and loop space maintainer is adjusted and applied in one visit and therefore can be planned in patients under general anesthesia. Other advantages include less time, more patient and parent satisfaction, and no laboratory work

    Device: prefabricated space maintainer

Interventions

  • Deviceprefabricated space maintainer

    i. Prefabricated band will be selected for the abutment tooth by measuring the mesiodistal diameter of the abutment tooth with a caliper and will be adjusted with the internal diameter of the prefabricated band. ii. The loop will be selected based on the available mesiodistal space and buccolingual width of the abutment tooth, excessive length with be cut by cutting plier and will then place inside the band's tube by using a HOWE pliers. iii. Cotton roll isolation will use, then will be cemented with glass ionomer,

    Also known as: chair side space maintainer

  • Deviceconventional space maintainer

    i. A full arch Impressions will be taken with alginate material. ii. Impressions will be poured up using dental stone within 30 min of the impression taking. iii. The children will be given an appointment for space maintainer insertion. iv. In the second visit , Cotton roll isolation will use, cementation will be performed with glass ionomer .

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. appliance success

    evaluation of clinical success criteria ( • Integrity of each component of band and loop - solder breakdown - decementation - abutment fracture - Soft tissue impingement ) Clinical examination by operator ( binary yes or no )

    Time frame: 0-3-9 month

Secondary outcomes

  1. Space loss between the abutment teeth.

    • Change in distance measured on digital cast between the mesial midpoint of the second deciduous molar and the distal midpoint of the primary canine in mm

    Time frame: 0-9 month

  2. arch dimension

    measured each of 1. Arch perimeter by measured on a digital cast as a sum of the incisor, canine and molar segment width in mm 2. Inter canine width = Measured on a digital cast from cusp tip of canine on one side to cusp tip of canine on the other side in mm 3. Intermolar width = Measured on a digital cast from central fossa of the second primary molar on one side to central fossa of the second primary molar on the other side in mm

    Time frame: 0-9 month

  3. • Patient satisfaction

    Patient-reported using 5-point Likert-type scale from 1-5 face scale

    Time frame: during insertion of appliance

  4. • Cost effectiveness

    Manually by incremental effectiveness cost ratio ,measuring unit is financial units per result

    Time frame: through study completion , an average of 9 month

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Tahririan D, Safaripour M, Eshghi A, Bonyadian AH. Comparison of the longevity of prefabricated and conventional band and loops in children's primary teeth. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2019 Nov 12;16(6):428-434. eCollection 2019 Nov-Dec. PubMed 31803390 ↗
  • Tyagi M, Rana V, Srivastava N, Kaushik N, Moirangthem E, Gaur V. Comparison of the Conventional Band and Loop Space Maintainers with Modified Space Maintainers: A Split-mouth Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2021;14(Suppl 1):S63-S68. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2046. PubMed 35082470 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 19, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06558812
Lead sponsor
Cairo University
Responsible party
amal fathy mahmoud mohammed elsayed saker (principal investigator, Cairo University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Aug 19, 2024
Start date
Dec 1, 2024 (estimated)
Primary completion
Sep 2025 (estimated)
Completion
Oct 2025 (estimated)
Last update
Aug 19, 2024

Study contacts

amal fathi mahmoud sakr sakr
Contact
amal.fathy@dentistry.cu.edu.eg
02001060718817
Dr.Sherif Bahgat El Tawil El Tawil, professor
Contact
Sherif.eltaweil@dentistry.cu.edu.eg
02001001481711
Dina Yousry El Kharadly, Lecturer
study director · October 6 University

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Aug 2024. 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