3D-Printed Resin Crowns vs Stainless Steel Crowns in Pulpotomized Primary Molars.
NCT07648979 · Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 26
Last updated 2026-06-15
Summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether 3D-printed resin-based crowns are an effective alternative to stainless steel crowns for restoring pulpotomized primary mandibular molars in children. The main questions it aims to answer are:
Do 3D-printed resin-based crowns provide better gingival health than stainless steel crowns? Are there differences in plaque accumulation, crown retention, and child and parent satisfaction between the two crown types?
Participants will:
Receive either a 3D-printed resin-based crown or a stainless steel crown after pulpotomy.
Attend follow-up visits for clinical evaluation over 12 months.
Conditions
- Dental Caries
Interventions
- DEVICE
-
3D printed resin based crowns
1-Select an appropriately sized resin-based prefabricated crown based on the mesio-distal width of the tooth. 2-Perform occlusal reduction of approximately 1.5-2.0 mm following the natural occlusal anatomy. 3-Reduce buccal and lingual cusps, central groove, and marginal ridges to achieve adequate occlusal clearance. 4-Perform proximal reduction using a tapered fissure or diamond bur to eliminate mesial and distal contacts by approximately 1.0 mm. 5-Avoid creating ledges or damaging adjacent teeth during proximal reduction. 6-Slightly reduce buccal and lingual surfaces to eliminate undercuts and facilitate crown seating. 7-Round and smooth all sharp line angles and points of the preparation. 8-In cases with adjacent teeth, perform additional interproximal reduction if required for proper seating.9-Try-in the crown intraorally and seat it using firm pressure from lingual to buccal direction. 10-Check marginal adaptation, ensuring slight subgingival extension (approximately 0.5-1.0 mm).
- DEVICE
-
Prefabricated stainless steel crowns
1-Select an appropriately sized stainless steel crown based on the mesiodistal width of the tooth. 2-Perform minimal occlusal reduction (approximately 1.0-1.5 mm) following the anatomical occlusal contour to create suficient space for crown placement. 3-Lightly reduce proximal contacts to allow crown seating, without creating steps or excessive taper. 4-Perform minimal buccal and lingual reduction only if required to eliminate undercuts and facilitate passive seating. 5-Round sharp line angles and smooth rough surfaces to allow proper adaptation. 5-Verify adequate occlusal clearance and passive path of insertion. 6-Try-in the crown and adjustsize if necessary to ensure proper fit. 7-Trim and contour crown margins to achieve optimal gingival adaptation (if needed). 8-Seat the crown firmly using finger pressure to confirm complete seating. 9-Cement the crown with glass ionomer cement and remove excess cement after initial setting.
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Cairo University
lead OTHER
Principal Investigators
-
Sherine Badr, PHD · Cairo University
-
Nariman Osama, BDS · Cairo University
-
Hanna Abdel Moneim, PHD · Cairo University
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- DOUBLE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 4 Years
- Max Age
- 8 Years
- Sex
- ALL
- Healthy Volunteers
- No
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2026-07-31
- Primary Completion
- 2027-07-31
- Completion
- 2027-08-31
Countries
- Egypt
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
Comparative Study Between Zirconia Crowns and Endocrowns in Pulpotomized Primary Molars
NCT04073901 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Digital Occlusal Analysis and Bite Force Evaluation of the Hall Technique Vs Stainless Steel Crowns in Primary Molars Using T-scan
NCT07295574 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Primary Molars Restoration Using Different Pediatric Crowns.
NCT04144062 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Assessment of Clinical Success of Custom-Made Versus Prefabricated Zirconia Crowns in Pulpotomized Primary Molars
NCT07738471 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Digital Crowns Versus Prefabricated Crowns on Primary Teeth
NCT06305845 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Outcomes of Digital vs Prefab Crowns for Pulpotomized Primary Molars
NCT06733909 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
3D-printed Endocrowns Versus Prefabricated Zirconia Crowns in Pulpally-treated Primary Molars
NCT04909827 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Direct Resin Composite Restoration of Primary Anterior Teeth Using Custom 3D Printed Templates
NCT06478004 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparative Evaluation of Bioflx Crowns vs Stainless Steel Crowns
NCT06396195 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Effect of Different Cavity Designs on the Clinical Performance of 3D- Printed Resin Composite Partial-Coverage Restorations in Vital Molars
NCT07667946 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
3D-printed Ceromer Crowns Versus Stainless Steel in Posterior Primary Molars
NCT07091331 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Performance and Convenience of Four Types of Crowns for Primary Molars
NCT06456879 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Partial Pulpotomy Procedure in Primary Molars Utilizing Different Capping Materials and Different Restorative Methods
NCT06227390 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Resin Endocrown as Long Term Interim Restoration Versus Stainless Steel Crown for Endodontically Treated First Permanent Molar in Children: Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.
NCT05250609 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Performance of Alkasite-based Restorations in Children
NCT07263555 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Evaluation of Polymethyl Methacrylate CAD/CAM Crowns Versus Prefabricated Zirconia Crowns in Primary Molars
NCT06113770 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of Prefabricated CAD/CAM PEEK Crowns Used in Primary Molars
NCT06583759 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of a 3D Printed Space Maintainer Versus the Conventional Band and Loop
NCT07161076 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluating the Efficiency of Newly Designed Prefabricated PMMA Crowns for Restoring Primary Teeth in Comparison to Stainless Steel and Zirconia Crowns
NCT04479046 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison Between Stainless-Steel, Zirconia and Fiberglass Crowns for Deciduous Molars
NCT06003257 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
3D Printed Ceramic-Filled Photopolymer Resin Vs. CAD/CAM Resin Composite Overlays for Restoration of Extensively Damaged Endodontically Treated Posterior Teeth. An 18-month Follow-up
NCT07378982 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Parent Satisfaction With Zirconia, Bioflx, and 3D-Printed Crowns for Primary Molars
NCT07672470 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
CLINICAL PERFORMANCE OF PEDIATRIC CROWNS IN PRIMARY MOLAR
NCT07426445 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Clinical Performance and Antibacterial Effect of Alkasite Bioactive Material in Restoring Pulpotomized Primary Molars
NCT07094854 ·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