Immediate implant placement with titanium mesh and xenograft versus collagen membrane for buccal bone defects in the front upper jaw
Official title: Comparison of Flapless Immediate Implant Placement With Titanium Mesh Versus Immediate Implants Placement With Collagen Membrane in Type II Socket: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Run by Misr International University · NCT06875830 · Data updated 2026-11-12
This trial tests whether adding a titanium mesh with xenograft to immediate implants helps build thicker buccal bone than using a collagen membrane alone in patients with front-upper jaw defects.
Quick facts
| Study type | Interventional |
|---|---|
| Ages | 21 Years to 50 Years |
| Sex | All |
| Enrollment | 20 (estimated) |
| Sponsor | Misr International University Academic / other |
| Locations | 1 site (Cairo, Heliopolis - Cairo) |
| Status | Recruiting |
| Started | March 6, 2025 |
| Main results expected | July 1, 2026 |
| Study ends | September 1, 2026 |
| Registry record updated | July 6, 2026 |
| Trial ID | NCT06875830 on ClinicalTrials.gov |
Is this trial a fit for you?
✓Likely a good fit
Adults 21–50 years with anterior maxillary defects requiring immediate implant placement and buccal bone deficiency, who are ASA I and able to comply with follow-up.
✕Probably not a fit
Patients with bruxism, smokers, or pregnant/lactating individuals may not benefit from this approach.
A plain-English reading of the study's rules. Only the study team can confirm whether you qualify.
What this trial studies
This parallel-arm randomized trial compares two approaches to immediate implant placement in patients with buccal bone defects in the anterior maxilla. Group A uses xenograft grafting covered by a titanium mesh and collagen membrane, while Group B uses xenograft grafting covered by a collagen membrane alone. Outcomes include buccal bone thickness and soft tissue thickness measured at 6 and 12 months, along with postoperative pain and swelling documented for the first two weeks after surgery. Participants are adults aged 21–50, ASA I, with at least one remaining root or badly decayed tooth in the anterior maxilla and deficient buccal bone, and will be followed to assess healing and implant stability. Data will be analyzed to determine if the mesh-assisted approach provides a thicker buccal plate compared with the membrane-alone method.
Why it matters
Potential benefit: If successful, this approach could improve esthetic outcomes and long-term stability of implants in patients with buccal bone defects.
How similar studies have gone: Previous work suggests please note: similar bone augmentation strategies have shown promise, but direct comparison between titanium mesh with xenograft and collagen membrane alone in this exact setting is less established.
Who can join: the full rules
Show full inclusion / exclusion criteria
Inclusion Criteria: 1. Patients who have at least one remaining root or badly decayed tooth in anterior maxilla. 2. Systemically free patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists I; ASA I) 3. Patients aged from 21 to 50 years old 4. Buccal bone partial deficiency (extraction socket type II) 5. Good oral hygiene 6. Accepts the follow-up period (cooperative patients) 7. Patient accepts to provides an informed consent Exclusion Criteria: 1. Patients with habits that may jeopardize the implant longevity and affect the results of the study such as parafunctional habits such as bruxism 2. Smokers 3. Pregnant and lactating females
Where it's running
-
Faculty of oral & dental Medicine,Misr international University
Cairo, Heliopolis - Cairo, Egypt Recruiting
Study contacts
- Principal investigator: ahmed H Farid, Masters — Assistant lecturer
- Study coordinator: Hani El Nahas, PhD
- Email: zeinab.hafez@miuegypt.edu.eg
- Phone: +201221334637
Similar studies
Other studies for the same condition or treatment. Recruiting studies are listed first.
-
Enhanced hydrogel xenograft for open maxillary sinus augmentation
This study tests a hydrogel-enhanced xenograft material to lift the sinus floor during open augmentation and sees if it improves bone formation and tissue response compared with doing the augmentation without graft material.
-
Neocement® Inject P for dental bone augmentation and regeneration.
This study will try Neocement® Inject P, an injectable calcium‑phosphate bone substitute, in adults having reconstructive dental or maxillofacial surgery to see if it is safe and helps bone heal.
-
Neobone® safety and performance in dental bone grafting
This project will collect real-world data to see if Neobone® is safe and helps bone heal in adults having reconstructive dental procedures.
-
Bone grafting at implant removal to help success of putting a new implant in the same spot
This study tests whether doing bone grafting at the same time as removing a failed dental implant helps people who plan to get a new implant in the same location.
-
Rebuilding upper jaw ridge using retromolar bone blocks with or without a collagen membrane
This will test whether putting a collagen membrane over an onlay bone block and particulate bone in the upper jaw helps people who need ridge rebuilding get more bone.
-
One-stage ridge splitting in the back lower jaw using two techniques
This compares two surgical methods—piezo surgery versus conventional bone-disc cuts—to widen the narrow back lower jaw so dental implants can be placed in adults with limited ridge width.
How to take part
- Review the eligibility criteria above with your treating physician.
- Check the official listing on ClinicalTrials.gov for the latest contact details and recruitment status.
- Contact the study coordinator or principal investigator to ask for pre-screening. Pre-screening is free and never obligates you to enroll.