Efficacy of Combined Blood Clot and Platelet Rich Fibrin Scaffolds in Regeneration of Necrotic Immature Permanent Teeth

November 2, 2020 updated by: Nourhan M.Aly

Efficacy of Combined Blood Clot and Platelet Rich Fibrin Scaffolds in Regeneration of Necrotic Immature Permanent Teeth (A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial)

The aim of the present study is to assess clinically and radio-graphically the regenerative potential of immature permanent teeth with necrotic pulp using blood clot and Platelet rich fibrin scaffolds.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

30 immature necrotic permanent teeth in patients will be allocated and divided into two groups. Group 1 will be treated by regenerative procedure using blood clot as a scaffold and Group 2 will be treated with regenerative procedures using combined blood clot and Platelet rich fibrin as a scaffold.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

30

Phase

  • Phase 2

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Alexandria, Egypt, 21512
        • Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

8 years to 18 years (Child, Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Necrotic incisors with immature roots
  • Pulp space not needed for post and core.
  • The patient has to be free from any coagulation disorders, with normal platelets count.
  • Good oral hygiene
  • Cooperative patient

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Internal or external root resorption.
  • Root fracture and/or alveolar fracture.
  • Previous root canal treatment.
  • Medically compromised patients
  • Uncooperative patient

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Induced blood clot scaffold

Bleeding will be induced in the canal by passing a size 30 sterile K-file 3 mm beyond the apex with the goal of having the entire canal filled with blood to the level of the cemento-enamel junction. Bleeding will be stopped just below the cemento enamel junction.

Biodentine will be placed approximately 3-4 mm below the cementoenamel junction.

Experimental: Induced blood clot scaffold combined with Platelet rich fibrin
Platelet-rich fibrin will be prepared by drawing the patient blood into a 10mL test tube without the addition of an anticoagulant. To prevent the blood from coagulating after coming in contact with the glass tube, it will be centrifuged immediately using a table top centrifuge** at 400 g force for 12 minutes. Then platelet-rich fibrin membrane will be placed into the canal space to a level 3 mm below the cemento-enamel junction using hand plugger following the induction of apical bleeding by passing a number 30 sterile hand file 3 mm beyond the apex of the tooth. Biodentine cap will be placed over the platelet-rich fibrin scaffold.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Subjective pain assessment
Time Frame: 1 month
The patient will be asked about the presence of any pain or discomfort. Pain severity will be categorized as: no pain - mild pain - moderate pain - severe pain
1 month
Subjective pain assessment
Time Frame: 3 months
The patient will be asked about the presence of any pain or discomfort. Pain severity will be categorized as: no pain - mild pain - moderate pain - severe pain
3 months
Subjective pain assessment
Time Frame: 6 months
The patient will be asked about the presence of any pain or discomfort. Pain severity will be categorized as: no pain - mild pain - moderate pain - severe pain
6 months
Subjective pain assessment
Time Frame: 12 months
The patient will be asked about the presence of any pain or discomfort. Pain severity will be categorized as: no pain - mild pain - moderate pain - severe pain
12 months
Assessment of pulp vitality
Time Frame: 1 month
Pulp vitality will be assessed using thermal and electric pulp sensibility tests
1 month
Assessment of pulp vitality
Time Frame: 3 months
Pulp vitality will be assessed using thermal and electric pulp sensibility tests
3 months
Assessment of pulp vitality
Time Frame: 6 months
Pulp vitality will be assessed using thermal and electric pulp sensibility tests
6 months
Assessment of pulp vitality
Time Frame: 12 months
Pulp vitality will be assessed using thermal and electric pulp sensibility tests
12 months
Assessment of root development
Time Frame: 1 month
Continued root development will be assessed using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and compared with the contra-lateral healthy tooth
1 month
Assessment of root development
Time Frame: 3 months
Continued root development will be assessed using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and compared with the contra-lateral healthy tooth
3 months
Assessment of root development
Time Frame: 6 months
Continued root development will be assessed using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and compared with the contra-lateral healthy tooth
6 months
Assessment of root development
Time Frame: 12 months
Continued root development will be assessed using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and compared with the contra-lateral healthy tooth
12 months
Assessment of the size of periapical radiolucency
Time Frame: 1 month
Size of the lesion will be assessed using the periapical index score. The PAI provides an ordinal scale of 5 scores ranging from 1 (healthy) to 5 (severe periodontitis with exacerbating features).
1 month
Assessment of the size of periapical radiolucency
Time Frame: 1 month
Size of the lesion will be assessed using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).
1 month
Assessment of the size of periapical radiolucency
Time Frame: 3 months
Size of the lesion will be assessed using the periapical index (PAI) score. The PAI provides an ordinal scale of 5 scores ranging from 1 (healthy) to 5 (severe periodontitis with exacerbating features).
3 months
Assessment of the size of periapical radiolucency
Time Frame: 3 months
Size of the lesion will be assessed using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).
3 months
Assessment of the size of periapical radiolucency
Time Frame: 6 months
Size of the lesion will be assessed using the periapical index (PAI) score. The PAI provides an ordinal scale of 5 scores ranging from 1 (healthy) to 5 (severe periodontitis with exacerbating features).
6 months
Assessment of the size of periapical radiolucency
Time Frame: 6 months
Size of the lesion will be assessed using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).
6 months
Assessment of the size of periapical radiolucency
Time Frame: 12 months
Size of the lesion will be assessed using the periapical index (PAI) score. The PAI provides an ordinal scale of 5 scores ranging from 1 (healthy) to 5 (severe periodontitis with exacerbating features).
12 months
Assessment of the size of periapical radiolucency
Time Frame: 12 months
Size of the lesion will be assessed using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT).
12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Collaborators

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Mahmoud MS Hassan, M.Sc, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
  • Study Director: Mohamed Ibrahim, PhD, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
  • Study Director: Sybel M Moussa, PhD, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
  • Study Chair: Nihal A Lehita, PhD, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

July 6, 2018

Primary Completion (Actual)

January 20, 2020

Study Completion (Actual)

August 30, 2020

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 8, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 14, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

May 18, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

November 4, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 2, 2020

Last Verified

November 1, 2020

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Pulp Necroses

Clinical Trials on Blood clot scaffold

3
Subscribe