Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Ministry of Health, France | OTHER_GOV |
| Hôpital Charles Foix | OTHER |
| Hôtel Dieu - Service d'odontologie (Toulouse) | UNKNOWN |
| Dental practitionners |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The main purpose of this trial is to determine which material, between ceramic and composite, is best to manufacture dental inlays and onlays in the treatment of moderate dental substance losses, generally due to dental caries. Restorations will be done using direct Computer Assisted Design and Manufacturing (CAD-CAM). Another aim of this study is to determine which factors influence the success of these restorations.
WHO estimates dental caries prevalence to be over 90% adults worldwide. When tooth substance loss due to the decayed tissue is small, a filling is done by the dentist directly. When the substance loss is important, dentists often treat it with a crown, which presents the disadvantage of further mutilating the tooth. An intermediate technique consists in manufacturing an inlay or an onlay: these restorations become more and more common since they are a minimally invasive solution in such cases. Inlays and onlays can be made of metal, ceramic or composite. Patients tend to refuse metallic restorations, so that dentists generally have to choose between composite and ceramic. Composite wears whereas ceramics fracture. Published in vitro studies provide possible answers to which material is most effective but very few clinical studies have been conducted to confirm them. Material\'s choice for inlay manufacturing is thus more country-based than evidence-based (Most french dentists choose composite while US dentists prefer ceramics for example). The main objective of this trial is to compare the clinical performance of ceramic and composite inlays/onlays. Other objectives include looking for the prognostic factors of these restorations and validating the criteria proposed by the World Dental Federation (FDI) to evaluate dental restorations.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| ceramic | Active Comparator | Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (Empress CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent) |
|
| composite | Active Comparator | Nanohybrid composite resin (Lava Ultimate, 3M Espe) |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ceramic (Empress CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent) | Device | Leucite-reinforced glass ceramic (Empress CAD, Ivoclar Vivadent) |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| FDI criteria for dental restorations assessment | 2 independent evaluators The primary outcome will consist in the FDI instrument for dental restorations assessment, as it was published after consensus in 2007 and updated in 2010 . This instrument is composed of three dimensions (biological, functional and esthetic), each consisting of several items that are assessed by clinical and radiographic examination according to Likert scales of 5 terms. Some items are evaluated quantitatively, others visually.The worst score of all items is retained as the overall score of the restoration, thus resulting in a single (ordinal) primary outcome. | at 2 years |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Restoration survival analysis | The primary outcome will consist in the FDI instrument for dental restorations assessment, as it was published after consensus in 2007 and updated in 2010 . This instrument is composed of three dimensions (biological, functional and esthetic), each consisting of several items that are assessed by clinical and radiographic examination according to Likert scales of 5 terms. Some items are evaluated quantitatively, others visually.The worst score of all items is retained as the overall score of the restoration, thus resulting in a single (ordinal) primary outcome. |
Not provided
Inclusion criteria :
Exclusion criteria :
Randomization criterium :
Exclusion from randomization criteria :
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| hélène fron chabouis, DDS, MSc | APHP, Hôpital Charles Foix, Service d'odontologie, Ivry-sur-Seine, France ; Faculté de chirurgie dentaire, Service de biomatériaux (URB2i EA4462), Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Montrouge, France. | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hôpital Charles Foix (APHP), Service d'odontologie | Ivry-sur-Seine | 94200 | France | |||
| Dental pratice |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18341239 | Result | Hickel R, Roulet JF, Bayne S, Heintze SD, Mjor IA, Peters M, Rousson V, Randall R, Schmalz G, Tyas M, Vanherle G. Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials. Science Committee Project 2/98--FDI World Dental Federation study design (Part I) and criteria for evaluation (Part II) of direct and indirect restorations including onlays and partial crowns. J Adhes Dent. 2007;9 Suppl 1:121-47. | |
| 20628774 |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Cecoia website | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D003731 | Dental Caries |
| D000082882 | Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D017001 | Tooth Demineralization |
| D014076 | Tooth Diseases |
| D009057 | Stomatognathic Diseases |
| D006330 | Heart Defects, Congenital |
Not provided
Not provided
| UNKNOWN |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| composite (Lava Ultimate, 3M Espe) | Device | Nanohybrid composite resin (Lava Ultimate, 3M Espe) |
|
| at 2 years |
| wear | The primary outcome will consist in the FDI instrument for dental restorations assessment, as it was published after consensus in 2007 and updated in 2010 . This instrument is composed of three dimensions (biological, functional and esthetic), each consisting of several items that are assessed by clinical and radiographic examination according to Likert scales of 5 terms. Some items are evaluated quantitatively, others visually.The worst score of all items is retained as the overall score of the restoration, thus resulting in a single (ordinal) primary outcome. | at 2 years |
| overall quality of the restoration | The primary outcome will consist in the FDI instrument for dental restorations assessment, as it was published after consensus in 2007 and updated in 2010 . This instrument is composed of three dimensions (biological, functional and esthetic), each consisting of several items that are assessed by clinical and radiographic examination according to Likert scales of 5 terms. Some items are evaluated quantitatively, others visually.The worst score of all items is retained as the overall score of the restoration, thus resulting in a single (ordinal) primary outcome. | at 2 years |
| FDI instrument validity data | The primary outcome will consist in the FDI instrument for dental restorations assessment, as it was published after consensus in 2007 and updated in 2010 . This instrument is composed of three dimensions (biological, functional and esthetic), each consisting of several items that are assessed by clinical and radiographic examination according to Likert scales of 5 terms. Some items are evaluated quantitatively, others visually.The worst score of all items is retained as the overall score of the restoration, thus resulting in a single (ordinal) primary outcome. | at 2 years |
| Lyon |
| 69003 |
| France |
| Dental pratice | Paris | 75012 | France |
| Dental pratice | Paris | 75015 | France |
| Dental pratice | Paris | 75017 | France |
| Hôtel Dieu, Service d'odontologie | Toulouse | 31059 | France |
| Result |
| Hickel R, Peschke A, Tyas M, Mjor I, Bayne S, Peters M, Hiller KA, Randall R, Vanherle G, Heintze SD. FDI World Dental Federation: clinical criteria for the evaluation of direct and indirect restorations-update and clinical examples. Clin Oral Investig. 2010 Aug;14(4):349-66. doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0432-8. Epub 2010 Jul 14. |
| 24004961 | Derived | Fron Chabouis H, Prot C, Fonteneau C, Nasr K, Chabreron O, Cazier S, Moussally C, Gaucher A, Khabthani Ben Jaballah I, Boyer R, Leforestier JF, Caumont-Prim A, Chemla F, Maman L, Nabet C, Attal JP. Efficacy of composite versus ceramic inlays and onlays: study protocol for the CECOIA randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2013 Sep 3;14:278. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-278. |
| D018376 | Cardiovascular Abnormalities |
| D002318 | Cardiovascular Diseases |
| D006331 | Heart Diseases |
| D000082862 | Aortic Valve Disease |
| D006349 | Heart Valve Diseases |
| D000013 | Congenital Abnormalities |
| D009358 | Congenital, Hereditary, and Neonatal Diseases and Abnormalities |