Patient Satisfaction , Marginal Adaptation And Biocompatibility of Milled Biohpp Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Single Anterior Crowns Veneered With Two Different Techniques.
NCT04914325 · Status: COMPLETED · Phase: PHASE4 · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 32
Last updated 2024-02-06
Summary
Research question For patients in a need for anterior crown, does the use of Milled BioHPP PEEK copings veneered with CAD/CAM composite resin offer better patient satisfaction, marginal adaptation and biocompatibility when compared Milled BioHPP PEEK copings veneered with manual layering? Statement of the problem PEEK exhibits a unique modulus of elasticity close to human bone/dentine so it acts as a shock absorber with stress reducing effect. Moreover from a biologic point of view, PEEK is highly compatible with surrounding tissues and it has very promising surface properties . The use of peek in anterior area is limited due to its opaque nature and grayish color, this drawback has been overcome by the use of composite layering material . PEEK restorations can be veneered with manual or CAD/CAM techniques. Information is lacking regarding the influence of the veneering technique on the patient satisfaction , precision of fit and biocompatibility of these restorations which will in turn influence their performance in patient's satisfaction.
Rationale To achieve high esthetics when using PEEK it must be veneered by esthetic material 3 . It is available to be used manually or to be milled by CAD/CAM. The manual veneering of the PEEK coping with composite might affect the marginal integrity and the surrounding gingival tissues leading to decrease in the patient satisfaction, while the CAD/CAM veneering technique is proposed to have better patient satisfaction , marginal adaptation and an excellent biocompatible effect on the surrounding tissue. The importance of this trial lies in providing an alternative solution to the manual veneering technique, which will, in-turn, provide better restoration longevity results
Aim of the study:
The aim of this study is to evaluate the patient satisfaction ,marginal adaptation and biocompatibility of milled BioHPP PEEK copings veneered with CAD/CAM composite resin and compare them to milled BioHPP PEEK copings veneered with manual layering.
Null hypothesis:
There is no difference in the patient satisfaction, marginal adaptation and biocompatibility between milled BioHPP PEEK copings veneered with CAD/CAM composite resin and milled BioHPP PEEK copings veneered with manual layering.
Primary objective: - The Primary outcome: : patient satisfaction of the two groups will be assessed by rating score 0 unaccepted , 1 good , 2 excellent - Secondary outcome: Marginal adaptation of the two groups will be assessed using the modified Ryge criteria. - Tertiary outcome: Biocompatibility (Bleeding). Signs of inflammation and bleeding of the two groups will be recorded after clinical examination and probing using periodontal probe Trial design: - Randomized clinical trial
Eligibility criteria:
Inclusion criteria:
All subjects are required to be: 1-From 18-50 years old, be able to read and sign the informed consent document. 2- Have no active periodontal or pulpal diseases, have teeth with good restorations 3- Psychologically and physically able to withstand conventional dental procedures 4- Patients in a need for anterior crown. 5- Able to return for follow-up examinations and evaluation Exclusion criteria
1\. Patient less than 18 or more than 50 years 2. Patient with active resistant periodontal diseases 3. Patients with poor oral hygiene and uncooperative patients 4. Pregnant women 5. Patients in the growth stage with partially erupted teeth 6. Psychiatric problems or unrealistic expectations
Conditions
- Patient Satisfaction
- Gingival Bleeding
Interventions
- COMBINATION_PRODUCT
-
peek
After tooth preparation, adequate 2ry Impression using non aqueous elastomeric impression materials and bite registration will be taken. 5. Fabrication of the temporary restoration using composite resin temporary material and cemented using non Eugenol Zinc Oxide temporary cement. 11.a.iii. Fabrication and cementation of restoration: Bio-HPP will be supplied in the form of discs to fabricate crown core by CAD/CAM technology then veneered with two veneering techniques; the CAD/ CAM and the manual technique using the visio.lign system of appropriate shade. The finished Bio HPP crown will be cemented by adhesive resin cement according to manufacturer instruction
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Cairo University
lead OTHER
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- TRIPLE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 18 Years
- Max Age
- 50 Years
- Sex
- ALL
- Healthy Volunteers
- No
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2021-10-22
- Primary Completion
- 2023-01-22
- Completion
- 2024-01-22
Countries
- Egypt
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
Patient Satisfaction and Dimensional Accuracy of Bre Flex and Peek for Removable Partial Dentures
NCT03025555 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of Chewing Efficiency of Conventional Complete Denture in Comparison to Reinforced Poly Amide Denture
NCT03391063 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of Peri-Implant Tissues of Different Implant Assisted Overdentures
NCT06647199 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of Papilla Index Around Immediate Mandibular Molar Implants Using Customized Healing Abutment Versus Submerged Healing
NCT04449302 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Comparative Clinical Evaluation of BioFlx, Zirconia, and Stainless-Steel Crowns in Primary Molars
NCT06450093 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
One-piece and Two-piece Zirconia Abutments in Single Implant Crowns in Esthetic Region
NCT05583123 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Evaluation of Teeth Prepared With Vertical Preparation Versus Deep Chamfer
NCT05252689 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Prosthetic Complications in Fixed All-On-Four Prosthesis Reinforced with Poly Ether Ether Ketone (PEEK) Versus Cobalt Chromium (Co-Cr) Framework
NCT06631573 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
(PEEK) Housing Verses Metallic Housing of Ball and Socket Attachment on Retention of Mandibular Overdenture
NCT02950662 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Study of Wear in Composite Resin and Reinforced Acrylic Denture Teeth Used in Complete Denture Construction for Completely Edentulous Patients
NCT04839640 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Evaluation of CAD/CAM vs. Conventional Veneer Restorations
NCT06969911 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Two Years Follow up of Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Sub-periosteal Implant Retaining Maxillary Fixed Prosthesis
NCT05193110 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Single-retainer Lithium Di-silicate Versus Zirconia Resin Bonded Bridge for Replacement of an Anterior Missing Tooth.
NCT05861921 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Polyetheretherketone vs Cobalt-chromium Telescopic Removable Partial Denture in Kennedy Class I Patients Regarding Oral Health Related Quality of Life
NCT03771248 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Passive Fit of CAD/CAM Screw-retained Metal Frameworks Versus Screwmented Ones
NCT04372901 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison Between Injection Molded Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Framework and Cobalt Chromium Framework Removable Partial Dentures Regarding Periodontal Health of Abutment Teeth
NCT03777345 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Comparing Cobalt-Chromium Versus PEEK Secondary Telescopic Crowns on Implant Retained Mandibular Overdenture.
NCT06637930 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Wear Characteristics and Clinical Performance of Lithium Silicate Versus Monolithic Zirconia Crowns.
NCT03530020 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Assessment of Bone Volume Changes in Immediate Implant Placement Using Allograft Versus Xenograft in Mandibular Molars
NCT06962878 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
PEEK Versus PFM Implant Supported Superstructure
NCT03578913 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of CAD/CAM Onlays Fabricated by Subtractive Versus Additive Digital Manufacturing Techniques.
NCT05943782 ·Status: ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION ·Phase: NA
-
Prosthetic Maintenance of Two Implant-Retained Overdentures Reinforced With PEKK Versus Co-Cr Frameworks
NCT06219811 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Pink and White Esthetic Scores of Polymer-infiltrated-ceramic-network and Lithium Disilicate Implant Hybrid Abutment Crowns
NCT03220321 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Esthetic Outcome of 3D Printed Hybrid Ceramics as Final Restorations for Single Screw Retained Implant.
NCT07154602 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Effect of PEEK and Co-Cr Framework Reinforcement on Marginal Bone Loss Around Implants Supporting a Fixed All-on-four Prosthesis in Completely Edentulous Mandibles. A Randomized Controlled Clinial Trial
NCT06591611 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA