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.

Dental Restoration Failure Clinical Trial

Official title:
Clinical Performance of Polyethylene Fiber Reinforced Resin Composite Restorations (Wall Papering Technique) Versus Bulk Fill Resin Composite Restorations in Endodontically Treated Teeth: A One Year Randomized Clinical Trial

Status Completed

Clinical Trial Summary

The aim of this study will be to evaluate the clinical performance of polyethylene fiber reinforced resin composite restorations versus bulk fill resin composite restorations in endodontically treated teeth.

Clinical Trial Description

Statement of the problem: Restoration of non-vital teeth is always challenging for dentists. Without placing the coronal restoration, root canal treatments are not considered complete. Appropriate treatment plan selection should be based on remaining tooth structure, cavity wall thickness, tooth position in the arch, and load applied to the tooth. Previously, endodontically treated teeth (ETT) were reconstructed automatically with post, core, and full crown. But this treatment plan had many risks like root perforation, sacrificing a considerable amount of sound tooth structure, and tooth fracture.Several techniques and materials have been developed for the restoration of endodontically treated teeth including complete cast coverage, composite resins and amalgam and indirect restorations covering cusps. Resin-based materials provide rigidity and increase the fracture resistance of non-vital teeth by rein-forcing unsupported tissues. Advanced adhesive systems with improved physical properties are more aesthetic and support remaining tooth structures better than amalgam. In order to reduce polymerization shrinkage stresses, flowable resins with low elastic modulus have been suggested as a stress-absorbing layer under composite restorations. On the other hand, the use of flowable resin does not increase fracture resistance, and this layer results in contraction stresses. Rational: In fact, the primary aims of "biomimetic dentistry" are to be as minimally invasive as possible, and to substitute the missing hard dental tissues with restorative materials closely resembling the natural tissues regarding their mechanical features and properties. Leno weaved Ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (LWUHMWPE) fibers are plasma treated fibers. LWUHMWPE fiber reinforcement Ribbond systems (Ribbond THM, Ribbond Inc, Seattle, WA, USA) have been introduced in the attempt to increase composite resin toughness, thus increasing both durability and damage tolerance. These bondable reinforcement fibers can be closely adapted to the residual tooth structure without requiring additional preparation. The high modulus of elasticity and low flexural modulus of polyethylene fiber have a modifying effect on the interfacial stresses developed along the cavity walls. According to a systematic review published in 2021 that was done to evaluate various in vitro studies, it was confirmed that the effect of the Ultra-high-molecular weight polyethylene fibers is increasing the fracture resistance and making more favorable fractures in endodontically treated teeth. However, there is no enough clinical data regarding this point, so this proposal is introduced. ;

Study Design

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

Clinical Trial Details

NCT number	NCT05180903
Study type	Interventional
Source	Cairo University
Contact
Status	Completed
Phase	N/A
Start date	April 1, 2022
Completion date	September 10, 2023

View Details

See also
Status	Clinical Trial	Phase
Not yet recruiting	`NCT03608306` - Clinical Performance of Bioactive Restorative Material Versus Glass Hybrid Restorative in Posterior Restorations	N/A
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

Clinical trials are conducted in a series of steps, called phases - each phase is designed to answer a separate research question.

Phase 1: Researchers test a new drug or treatment in a small group of people for the first time to evaluate its safety, determine a safe dosage range, and identify side effects.
Phase 2: The drug or treatment is given to a larger group of people to see if it is effective and to further evaluate its safety.
Phase 3: The drug or treatment is given to large groups of people to confirm its effectiveness, monitor side effects, compare it to commonly used treatments, and collect information that will allow the drug or treatment to be used safely.
Phase 4: Studies are done after the drug or treatment has been marketed to gather information on the drug's effect in various populations and any side effects associated with long-term use.