Clinical Evaluation of Ceramage Inlays Cemented With Beautilink Self-Adhesive Resin Cement Versus Rely X Resin Cement in Carious Posterior Teeth
NCT06833177 · Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 50
Last updated 2026-04-07
Summary
Minimally invasive bonded partial restorations have become a crucial component of contemporary dental treatments. They address the shortcomings of direct restorations and provide patients with a less damaging alternative to full coverage restorations, which can be more harmful to the dental structure. Indirect inlay composite restorations have become a popular choice in restorative dentistry due to their aesthetic appeal and durability. These restorations allow for the preservation of tooth structure while utilizing the mechanical advantages of modern adhesive technology, which can reinforce the weakened compromised tooth structure.
The use of different adhesive materials with Ceramage can significantly influence the success of the restoration. Adhesive materials play a crucial role in ensuring a strong bond between the indirect restoration and the tooth structure. Additionally, the choice of adhesive material can also affect the ease of the cementation process. Self-adhesive resin cement simplifies the procedure by eliminating the need for separate bonding agents, thus reducing the risk of technique sensitivity which can lead to more consistent clinical outcomes and improved patient satisfaction.
Overall, the combination of Ceramage with appropriate adhesive materials offers a reliable and aesthetically pleasing solution for indirect inlay composite restorations, enhancing both the biological, functional and esthetic outcomes of dental treatments.
Conditions
- Caries Class Ii
Interventions
- OTHER
-
Beautilink SA cement
According to the manufacturer's instructions (BeautiLink SA - Shofu USA) * To enhance the adhesion, adhesive bonding agent BeautiBond Xtreme, Shofu will be applied on the tooth and cured according to the manufacturer's instructions. * Press the plunger of the auto-mix syringe of Beautilink SA to dispence the cement on the adhesive surface of the restoration. * Seat the restoration in the cavity and apply proper pressure after using Teflon to protect the adjacent teeth and help in the removal of the excess material. * Light-cure the excess material for 1-2 sec with a light-curing unit followed by removal of the tack-cured material with a probe. * Using a light-curing unit to cure each surface and marginal areas for 10 seconds. For areas where the light cannot reach, or when using opaque cement, hold the restoration in place for approximately 5 minutes after light-curing to allow for chemical curing.
- OTHER
-
RelyX resin cement
According to the manufacturer's instructions (Espe). * To enhance the adhesion, adhesive bonding agent 3M™ Scotchbond™ Universal Plus Adhesive will be applied on the tooth and cured according to the manufacturer's instructions. * Application of 3M™RelyX™ Universal Resin Cement into the cavity * Seat the restoration in the cavity and apply proper pressure after using Teflon to protect the adjacent teeth and help in the removal of the excess material. * Light-cure the excess material for 2-3 sec with a light-curing unit followed by removal of the tack-cured material with a probe. * Using a light-curing unit to cure each surface and marginal areas for 10 seconds. For areas where the light cannot reach, or when using opaque cement, hold the restoration in place for approximately 6 minutes after light-curing to allow for chemical curing.
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Cairo University
lead OTHER
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- DOUBLE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 18 Years
- Sex
- ALL
- Healthy Volunteers
- No
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2025-11-11
- Primary Completion
- 2027-05-11
- Completion
- 2027-08-20
Countries
- Egypt
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
Patient Satisfaction and Clinical Performance of Ultra-translucent Multi-layer Monolithic Zirconia and Lithium Disilicate Ceramic Laminate Veneers. Randomized Control Clinical Trial
NCT07113873 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
A 2-year Clinical Impact of Bulk-fill Low-viscosity Resin Composite Liners in Class II Restorations.
NCT06032689 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Measuring Quality of Life of Versacryl Relined Dentures
NCT03321500 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Evaluation of Indirect Tooth-Colored Onlays With Cervical Margin Relocation
NCT07157410 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Resin-Cement Type Influence on Cement Remnants in Implant-Supported Restorations
NCT06711237 ·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
-
Clinical Evaluation of CAD/CAM vs. Conventional Veneer Restorations
NCT06969911 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Patient Satisfaction and Crestal Bone Loss of Polymer Infiltrated Ceramic Network Versus Lithium Disilicate Implant Hybrid Abutment Crowns in Esthetic Zone
NCT03333889 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Wear of Vita Ambria Only Restoration Compared With IPS Emax Onlay Restoration
NCT05431465 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Performance of Metal Ceramic Fixed Dental Prostheses Using Two Porcelain Veneering Systems: A Randomized Clinical Trial
NCT07029880 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of Chewing Efficiency of Conventional Complete Denture in Comparison to Reinforced Poly Amide Denture
NCT03391063 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Immediate Implant Placement Using Xenograft Mixed with Vitamin D Versus Hyaluronic Acid.
NCT06842368 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Outcomes of Zirconia-reinforced Lithium Silicate Partial Coverage Crowns Compared to Lithium Disilicate Partial Coverage Crowns
NCT02861729 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of the Aesthetic Outcome of Lithium Disilicate (e.Max) All Ceramic Crowns on Titanium Implant Abutments in the Aesthetic Zone After Different Color Masking Approaches
NCT03686267 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
The Performance of Posterior Partial Coverage Coronal Restorations Luted With Two Differrent Systems.
NCT06457737 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Socket Shield Technique Versus Conventional Immediate Implant Placement in Thin Buccofacial Bone
NCT03264053 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison Between Direct Composite and Indirect Ceramic Laminate Veneers in Multiple Diastema Closure Cases
NCT06377423 ·Status: COMPLETED ·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
-
Prosthetic Complications of Screw Retained Restoration
NCT03674554 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Assessment Of Inlay Retained Bridge Designs (Tub Shaped And Inlay Shaped) In Missing Posterior Teeth Cases.
NCT03715842 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Retention of Metal Reinforced Polyamide Denture Base and Heat Cured Acrylic Resin Denture Base in Complete Mandibular Denture
NCT03385746 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of Two Implant Prosthetic Pathways
NCT02905838 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
One Year Clinical Evaluation of Milled BioHPP Polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-Based Versus Metal Ceramic Single Crowns
NCT03685513 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Assessment of Two Inlay -Retained Bridge Designs
NCT03224273 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Wear Behavior of Milled Posterior Crowns Fabricated From the New Monolithic Zirconia 5Y-TZP/3Y-TZP Compared to Lithium Disilicate
NCT04805281 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA