Clinical Efficacy of Subgingivally Delivered 1.2-mg Simvastatin in the Treatment of Individuals With Class II Furcation Defects: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

2012 ◽  
Vol 83 (12) ◽  
pp. 1472-1479 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.R. Pradeep ◽  
N. Priyanka ◽  
Nitish Kalra ◽  
Savitha B. Naik ◽  
Sonender P. Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Furcation Defects

Clinical evaluation of narrow diameter implants versus standard diameter implants with bone augmentation in posterior jaws:study protocol for a randomized controlled clinical trial

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shujiao Qian ◽  
Shichong Qiao ◽  
Yu Zhu ◽  
Xiao Zhang ◽  
Jiaji Mo
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Posterior Region ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Bone Augmentation ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Bone Width ◽  
Narrow Diameter Implants

Abstract Background: Nowadays, narrow diameter implants are being increasingly used in posterior regions with insufficient bone width to avoid invasive bone augmentation procedures. Recent studies have indicated that narrow implants with a diameter of 3.3 to 3.5mm showed comparable survival rate with standard diameter implants. However, there are no high-quality clinical trials comparing the clinical outcomes of narrow diameter implants to standard diameter implants with augmentation procedures in atrophic posterior region. The purpose of present study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy of narrow diameter implants in posterior jaws. Methods/Design: This study is designed as a prospective, single-center, 2-arm parallel, randomized controlled clinical trial. Patients in need of single implant crowns in posterior jaws will be included in the study according to clear defined inclusion-and-exclusion criteria. Randomized number table will be used to assign the patients into two groups: group 1: narrow diameter implant group (NDI); group 2: standard diameter implant with bone augmentation group (SDI). Implant survival rate, mechanical complications, marginal bone loss, peri-implant conditions and patients’ satisfaction will be recorded. Clinical and radiological re-evaluations will be performed at 6, 12, 36, 60 months after the final crowns delivery. Discussion: Our findings will help evaluate the clinical efficacy of narrow implant in posterior region. If the results were favorable, narrow implants might be recommended as a viable alternative for posterior region with insufficient bone width. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: ChiCTR1800020426 (registered on 29 December 2018)

Photodynamic therapy in the treatment of class II furcation: a randomized controlled clinical trial

2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (8) ◽  
pp. 781-788 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa H. Luchesi ◽  
Suzana P. Pimentel ◽  
Maria F. Kolbe ◽  
Fernanda V. Ribeiro ◽  
Renato C. Casarin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Photodynamic Therapy ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Maprotiline (Ludiomil) and Imipramine in Depressed In-Patients: A Controlled Study

1975 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 413-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
W Rieger ◽  
K Rickels ◽  
N Norstad ◽  
J Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Strong Tendency ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Randomized Controlled

In this double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial of maprotiline ( Ludiomil) against imipramine involving twenty-five newly admitted hospitalized patients, a strong tendency in favour of maprotiline over imipramine emerged. Improvement occurred faster and also at treatment end-point the trend in favour of maprotiline was still to be seen. The slight superiority in clinical efficacy of maprotiline over imipramine was present in both physician and patient measures. Incidences of side-effects were slightly lower for maprotiline than for imipramine.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document