Clinical Research Directory

Implant-supported Rehabilitation With SPAL Technique or Soft Tissue Augmentation

The primary aim of the present study is to compare the Sub-periosteal Peri-implant Augmented Layer (SPAL) technique and soft tissue augmentation (STA), performed simultaneously to implant placement, in terms of (i) implant survival rate and (ii) health/disease condition of the peri-implant tissues at 6 and 12 months following implant loading. The secondary aim of the project will be to compare the SPAL technique and STA in terms of intra- and post-operative morbidity. The study is designed as a single-blind, parallel-arm, randomized clinical trial. Patients will be recruited and treated at the Operative Unit of Dentistry, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale (A.U.S.L.) of Ferrara, Italy, and one University center (Research Centre for the Study of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases, University of Ferrara, Italy). Each patient will contribute the study with one sextant ("experimental sextant"). Each eligible patient will be randomly assigned to receive SPAL technique or STA according to a computer-generated randomization list. Surgical procedures will be performed by experienced periodontal and implant surgeons. Two calibrated, blinded examiners will take care of the assessment of clinical and radiographic parameters, Case Report Form (CRF) filling, as well as data extraction from CRFs for the preparation of the study database. The proportion of patients free from peri-implantitis at 12 months following loading will be the primary outcome variable of the study. The proportion of patients with complete resolution of the bone dehiscence (BD), dimensional variations and 12-months characteristics of BD, and patient-reported outcome measures will be the secondary outcomes. The design will test two hypotheses, with a non-inferiority trial in terms of primary outcome and a superiority trial in terms of secondary outcomes.

Luso-Cor Stent Compared to Other Endoscopic Techniques for Management of Fistulas and Anastomotic Dehiscences(ES-LCCE-UDFM)

The global prevalence of obesity has prompted an increase in bariatric surgery, which is the only management strategy that provides long-term weight loss and improvement of obesity-related diseases. Bariatric surgeries include sleeve gastrectomy(SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass(RYGB),and laparoscopically adjustable gastric banding(LAGB). The incidence of adverse events depends on the type of bariatric surgery performed, with serious adverse events occurring in approximately 4% and mortality in 0.1% patients. The incidence of fistulas after SG varies between 0.2% to 2.5% and between 1% and 4.9% in patients who have undergone an RYGB. The incidence of strictures after SG is approximately 0.35%. Older, more obese, and male patients with multiple comorbidities related to obesity are at increased risk for the development of fistulas and mortality following bariatric surgery. Additionally, surgery after LAGB increases the risk of adverse events. This study will compare the efficacy and safety of the Luso-Cor esophageal stent versus conventional covered metallic stents versus endoscopic vacuum therapy in the management of fistulas and anastomotic dehiscences after oncologic or bariatric surgery on the stomach and esophagus.