Dental Restoration Failure Clinical Trial
Official title:
Clinical Performance of Bioactive Restorative Material Versus Glass Hybrid Restorative in Posterior Restorations of High Caries Risk Patients: Randomized Clinical Trial
Clinical performance of bioactive restorative material versus glass hybrid restorative in posterior restorations of high caries risk patients will be evaluated over 12 months using Fédération Dentaire Internationale' (FDI) clinical criteria for the evaluation of direct and indirect restorations
The application of resin composite has been described as "technique sensitive". Although
glass ionomers are inferior to resin composite in esthetics, there are specific clinical
situations where glass ionomers are the materials of choice for restoring teeth as patients
at risk for caries and with carious lesions due to its ability to release fluoride and to
self-adhere to enamel and dentin.
However, Conventional glass ionomer have poor physical and mechanical properties and are more
liable to wear when compared to resin composite. The change in formulation of resin modified
glass ionomer restorations allowed them to have improved physic-mechanical properties,
combined with significant improvement in esthetic properties. Thus, in recent years glass
ionomer as direct restorative materials have become more user friendly. Unfortunately, most
of glass ionomers are not recommended as definitive final restorations for the permanent
dentition in stress bearing areas because they do not have the physical and mechanical
properties of amalgam or composite resin.
ACTIVA™ BioACTIVE-RESTORATIVE™ is recently introduced enhanced resin modified glass ionomer,
which the manufacturer (Pulpdent Corporation, USA) reports to be the first bioactive dental
materials with an ionic resin matrix, a shock-absorbing resin component, and bioactive
fillers that mimic physical and chemical properties of natural teeth. They are durable,
fracture and wear resistant, chemically bond to teeth, seal against bacterial microleakage,
and release and recharge with calcium, phosphate, and more fluoride ions than glass ionomers.
Thus, ACTIVA has more release and recharge of calcium, phosphate and fluoride than glass
ionomers with the esthetics, strength, and physical properties of composites, combining the
best attributes of both materials without compromising either one.
EQUIA® Forte is a fluoride-releasing, bulk-fill system which consists of EQUIA® Forte Fil, a
high strength glass hybrid restorative, and EQUIA® Forte Coat, a wear-resistant,
self-adhesive, light-cured resin coating. With improved flexural strength, and acid and wear
resistance, the manufacturer claims that EQUIA® Forte extends the recommended indications to
include stress-bearing Class II restorations.
The clinical performance of these materials regarding functional, esthetic and biological
properties is yet to be evaluated. The FDI clinical criteria provide more detailed evaluation
criteria and better differentiation between different types of failure; and incorporate
objective assessment tools and a clear scoring system than other scoring systems. Thus, this
study aims to contribute to providing evidence-based literature concerning current innovative
Resin-modified glass ionomer restorations using the most updated and standardized assessment
criteria, namely the FDI.
;
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Completed |
NCT06273410 -
Clinical Performance of An Alkasite Based Restorative Material With And Without Adhesive
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04326816 -
Restorative Treatment of Severe Tooth Wear; Direct vs Indirect
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02119195 -
Increasing Composite Restorations Sealants
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT05556551 -
Comparing Between Two Different Restoration
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT03175627 -
Clinical Performance of Posterior Composite Tooth Fillings in Adults
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT03771196 -
Clinical Evaluation of Bioactive Restorative vs. RMGI in Class V: A Randomized Control Trial
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT03859284 -
Evaluation of Adhering Flowable Composite With and Without Adhesive Vs Flowable in Cervical Lesions
|
N/A | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT05380973 -
Clinical Performance of Two Fiber Reinforced Resin Composites Versus Nanohybrid Resin Composite in Posterior Teeth Will be Evaluated Using Modified USPHS Criteria
|
N/A | |
Enrolling by invitation |
NCT06441032 -
Retrospective Database Study: Survival of Cast Restorations - Restorations Made of Precious Metal vs. Non-precious Metal
|
||
Active, not recruiting |
NCT04701320 -
Clinical Evaluation of Nano Hydroxyapatite Reinforced Glass Ionomer in Treatment of Root Caries in Geriatric Patients
|
Phase 1 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT02957734 -
Full Occlusal Rehabilitation for Patients With Severe Tooth Wear Using Indirect Composite Restorations
|
Phase 4 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT03834636 -
Impact of Patients Risk Factors on the Longevity of Aesthetic Restorations
|
Phase 3 | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT05499494 -
Clinical Evaluation of Bioactive Injectable Resin Composite in Posterior Restorations
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT05180903 -
Clinical Performance of Polyethylene Fiber Reinforced Resin Composite Restorations (Wall Papering Technique) Versus Bulk Fill Resin Composite Restorations in Endodontically Treated Teeth Will be Evaluated Using Modified USPHS Criteria.
|
N/A |