Ignite Creation Date:
2026-03-26 @ 3:20 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-03-31 @ 11:43 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT07424820
Status:
ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION
Last Update Posted:
2026-02-27
First Post:
2026-02-14
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Magnetic Mallet Vs Conventional Drilling in D4 Posterior Maxilla
Sponsor:
University of Mosul
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Clinical Comparative Analysis of Magnetic Mallet and Conventional Drilling Techniques for Implant Placement in D4 Bone: A Prospective Study
Status:
ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION
Status Verified Date:
2026-02
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate whether the magnetic mallet technique improves primary implant stability and clinical outcomes compared with conventional drilling during dental implant placement in the posterior maxilla with soft bone quality.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Does the magnetic mallet technique result in higher primary implant stability compared with conventional drilling?
Does the magnetic mallet technique reduce surgical trauma and related complications compared with conventional drilling?
Researchers will compare the magnetic mallet technique with conventional drilling to determine differences in implant stability, bone response, and clinical outcomes.
Participants will:
Undergo dental implant placement using either the magnetic mallet technique or conventional drilling.
Be clinically and radiographically evaluated for implant stability and postoperative outcomes during follow-up
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Does the magnetic mallet technique result in higher primary implant stability compared with conventional drilling?
Does the magnetic mallet technique reduce surgical trauma and related complications compared with conventional drilling?
Researchers will compare the magnetic mallet technique with conventional drilling to determine differences in implant stability, bone response, and clinical outcomes.
Participants will:
Undergo dental implant placement using either the magnetic mallet technique or conventional drilling.
Be clinically and radiographically evaluated for implant stability and postoperative outcomes during follow-up
Detailed Description:
This study is a prospective clinical trial designed to compare the magnetic mallet technique with conventional drilling for dental implant placement in the posterior maxilla characterized by soft bone quality (D4 bone). Achieving adequate primary implant stability in this region remains a clinical challenge, and techniques that preserve and condense bone may improve treatment outcomes.
The magnetic mallet technique uses controlled electromagnetic impulses to prepare the implant site through bone condensation rather than bone removal, potentially enhancing primary stability and reducing surgical trauma. In contrast, conventional drilling relies on rotational cutting instruments that remove bone and may generate heat, which can negatively affect bone vitality.
Eligible participants requiring dental implants in the posterior maxillary region will be randomly allocated to one of two groups: implant site preparation using the magnetic mallet technique or conventional drilling. All implants will be placed following standardized surgical protocols.
Primary outcomes will include the assessment of primary implant stability using objective measurement methods. Secondary outcomes will evaluate peri-implant bone response, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and overall clinical performance during follow-up.
The results of this study aim to provide clinical evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of the magnetic mallet technique compared with conventional drilling, particularly in soft posterior maxillary bone, to support evidence-based decision-making in implant dentistry
The magnetic mallet technique uses controlled electromagnetic impulses to prepare the implant site through bone condensation rather than bone removal, potentially enhancing primary stability and reducing surgical trauma. In contrast, conventional drilling relies on rotational cutting instruments that remove bone and may generate heat, which can negatively affect bone vitality.
Eligible participants requiring dental implants in the posterior maxillary region will be randomly allocated to one of two groups: implant site preparation using the magnetic mallet technique or conventional drilling. All implants will be placed following standardized surgical protocols.
Primary outcomes will include the assessment of primary implant stability using objective measurement methods. Secondary outcomes will evaluate peri-implant bone response, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and overall clinical performance during follow-up.
The results of this study aim to provide clinical evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of the magnetic mallet technique compared with conventional drilling, particularly in soft posterior maxillary bone, to support evidence-based decision-making in implant dentistry
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: