Contact Tightness of Zirconomer Versus Nanohybrid Composite in Occlusoproximal Cavities in Molars
NCT06596707 · Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 52
Last updated 2024-09-19
Summary
To achieve an optimal contact area is essential to avoid tooth migration, food impaction, and the occurrence of secondary caries. However, proximal restorations constitute challenge for the professional and tight contact points are difficult to obtain depending not only on tools used, but also on type of restorative material. Current tooth-colored restorative materials are not condensable and there is shrinkage with setting. The aim of this study is to compare the proximal contact tightness of zirconia reinforced glass ionomer versus conventional nanohybrid resin composite when used in class II cavities.
Conditions
- Contact Tightness in Restoring Proximal Surfaces in Posterior Teeth
Interventions
- PROCEDURE
-
Zirconomer
zirconia modified glass ionomer
- PROCEDURE
-
Nanohybrid composite
conventional composite
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Cairo University
lead OTHER
Principal Investigators
-
Alaa F Abdelsalam, phD · lecturer of conservative dentistry, Cairo university
-
Hadier M Gad, PhD · Lecturer of conservative dentistry, Cairo university
-
Manar A Elmokanen, PhD · Lecturer of conservative dentistry, Cairo University
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 19 Years
- Max Age
- 35 Years
- Sex
- ALL
- Healthy Volunteers
- Yes
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2023-07-12
- Primary Completion
- 2024-09-12
- Completion
- 2024-11-01
Countries
- Egypt
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
One-year Clinical Evaluation of Bulk-fill Versus Conventional Incremental Posterior Restoration by FDI Criteria
NCT02891967 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Assessment of Indirect Restoration Fabricated From Nano Hybrid Composite Blocks Versus Ceramic Blocks in Badly Broken Teeth One Year Follow up
NCT04563624 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE1
-
Clinical Performance Of Conserved Chalky White Demineralized Enamel Cavity Margins Versus Totally Removed Carious Margins In Class V Cavities Restored With Composite Resin
NCT05614076 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Restoration of Permanent Molars Affected With (MIH) Using Composite Restorations or Preformed Metal Crowns
NCT04658602 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Performance of Nano Fiber Reinforced Versus Conventional Nano Hybrid Composite in Restoring Premolars
NCT05808075 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Retention Rate of Hydroxyapatite Nano-Fiber Reinforced Flowable Composite Versus Conventional
NCT03264105 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Comparing CAD/CAM vs Composite for Carious Hypomineralized Molars Evaluating Clinical Outcomes of Both Treatments.
NCT07049016 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of Performance and Occlusal Wear of Low Shrinkage Giomer Compared to Nanohybrid Resin Composite
NCT05949502 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
3D-printed Endocrowns Versus Prefabricated Zirconia Crowns in Pulpally-treated Primary Molars
NCT04909827 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Injectable Resin Composite Versus Dual-cured Resin Cement for Cementation of Indirect Onlay Restorations
NCT05954156 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Performance of Zirconia Reinforced GI Versus Conventional Viscous GI in Geriatric Patients
NCT04298151 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE2
-
Aesthetic Performance of Two Injectable Resin Composites in Class V Cavities: A Randomized Clinical Trial
NCT06950762 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Custom-Made Zirconia Crowns and 3D-Printed Resin Crowns Versus Ready-Made Zirconia Crowns in Primary Molars
NCT06581510 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Retention of Bioflx Crowns Compared to Zirconia Crowns on Primary Molars
NCT06856070 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Comparative Study Between Zirconia Crowns and Endocrowns in Pulpotomized Primary Molars
NCT04073901 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Evaluation of Bioactive Resin Composites Versus Caries Control Technique in Management of Class I Carious Cavities in High Caries Risk Patients: a Randomized Clinical Trial
NCT06797843 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Evaluation of Different Bioactive Restorative Materials for Cervical Carious in High Caries Risk Patients
NCT06736964 ·Status: ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION ·Phase: NA
-
Partial Caries Removal in Permanent Molars Restored Using Giomer
NCT06601972 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Performance of Alkasite-based Restorations in Children
NCT07263555 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
A 2-year Clinical Performance of Two Different Ion-releasing Bulk-fill Restorative Materials Posterior Cavities
NCT05952609 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Class II Restoration Using Bioactive Restorative Material vs Polyacid Modified Composite Resin in Primary Molars
NCT04030117 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Three-Year Clinical Performance of Fiber-reinforced Versus Indirect Resin Composite Posterior Restorations
NCT06803537 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Radiographic Assessment of Glass Ionomer Restorations With and Without Prior Application of Nano Silver Fluoride in Occlusal Carious Molars Treated With Partial Caries Removal Technique
NCT03193606 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Performance of Injectable Universal Flowable Composite in Proximal Cavities of Posterior Teeth.
NCT05263089 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Performance Of Class I Composite Restorations After Cavity Finishing By Air Abrasion Versus Diamond Stone
NCT06107218 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA