An interventional study of Guided bone regeneration (GBR) in Vertical Ridge Deficiency and Horizontal Ridge Deficiency, sponsored by University of Michigan. Withdrawn at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-07-25.
Sponsored by University of Michigan · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The purpose of this study is to compare alveolar ridge augmentation outcomes of two types of membranes for vertical and horizontal mandibular ridge augmentation: Customized CAD/CAM Titanium Mesh versus Reinforced Perforated PTFE Mesh (RPM).
University of Michigan is the lead sponsor of 1,475 studies on the registry; 196 are open to participants now.
Of its 162 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 128 (79%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
A customized CAD/CAM Titanium Mesh will be used to cover the bone graft
Procedure: Guided bone regeneration (GBR)
A Reinforced Perforated PTFE Mesh membrane will be used to cover the bone graft
Procedure: Guided bone regeneration (GBR)
A composite graft composed of a 50:50 proportion of autogenous bone and a demineralized bone mineral will be positioned around the bony defect or placed in the membrane, depending on the group randomization. The selected membrane will then be secured with screws to ensure a complete and stable coverage of the grafted area.
Ridge width changes in mm
Radiographic changes of the ridge width based on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan measurements
Time frame: 6 months
Ridge height changes in mm
Radiographic changes of the ridge width based on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan measurements
Time frame: 6 months
Change in the mucosal thickness in mm
Change in the mucosal thickness due to the provided space from baseline to the surgical mesh removal using an ultrasound
Time frame: 6 months
Histological outcomes of the augmented bone
In terms of the amount of newly formed vital bone, residual graft particles, and connective tissue (CT)/other non-mineralized tissue components as a percentage
Time frame: 6 months
The volumetric bone gain of the grafted area in mm3
Radiographic changes of bone volume based on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan measurements
Time frame: 6 months
Rate of complications
Percentage that had complications associated with each technique
Time frame: 6 months
Cost analysis
Difference in cost-effectiveness in dollars
Time frame: 6 months
This study is withdrawn, as verified in Jul 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions 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.
University of Michigan