Clinical Assessement of Glazed Versus Polished Lithium Disilicate Crowns in Surface Roughness and Enamel Antagonists Wear

Tooth Decay Clinical Trial

Official title:

Patient Satisfaction and Clinical Assessment of Surface Roughness and Wear of Enamel Antagonists for Polished Versus Glazed Posterior Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramic Crowns

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Not yet recruiting

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03696849
• Other study ID #: CEBD-CU-2018-09-34
• Status: Not yet recruiting
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: November 2018
• Est. completion date: January 2020

Study information

• Verified date: October 2018
• Source: Cairo University
• Contact: Mervat Rouchdy, M.D.s
• Phone: 01272625020
• Email: mervatmourad82[@]gmail.com
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

It is believed that final glazing yields the most acceptable ceramic surfaces in terms of smoothness. However, since reglazing must be performed in a dental laboratory with the use of a thermal furnace, it requires multiple office visits. Repeated firings have a destructive effect on ceramic surfaces and can cause deformation. Conversely, polishing is easy and simple and can be accomplished in a single session.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Not yet recruiting
• Enrollment: 28
• Est. completion date: January 2020
• Est. primary completion date: November 2019
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years to 50 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients from 18-50 years old who are able to read and sign the informed consent document.

• Physically and psychologically able to tolerate conventional restorative procedures.

• Have no active periodontal or pulpal diseases, have teeth with good restorations.

• Patients have no temporomandibular disorders.

• Each participant needed a crown on either a first or second premolar or first or second molar in any arch.

• Teeth selected shoud include:

restorability with a crown:root ratio of at least 1:1. presence of an opposing natural tooth which was non-restored or minimally restored.

the presence of two non-restored or minimally restored teeth opposing each other on the same quadrants as the crowned tooth and the opposing to serve as enamel controls. Minimally restored was defined as teeth which have no restoration greater than a Class II amalgam restoration.

• Willing to return for follow-up examinations and evaluation.

Exclusion criteria

• Patients in the growth stage with partially erupted teeth.

• Patients with poor oral hygiene and motivation.

• Pregnant women.

• Psychiatric problems or unrealistic expectations.

• Lack of opposite occluding dentition in the area intended for restoration.

• Patients with temporomandibular disorders.

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Dental Caries
• Tooth Decay

Intervention

Other:
• polished emax Press
lithium disilicate glass ceramic crowns subjected to polishing only

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
n/a

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Cairo University

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Antagonists enamel wear using profilometer	wear of enamel antagonists opposing to emaxPress crowns that will be measured in um	1 year
Secondary	Restoration surface Roughness using profilometer	restoration roughness after different finishing methods that will me measured in um	1 year
Secondary	Patient satisfaction	Questionnaire	1 year