Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Compare the comfort and durability of Ceramic (VITA,Suprinity ,VS) vs Resin Bloc (VOCO, Grandio Bloc,GB) Endocrown by chairside CAD/CAM system (computer aided design / manufacture).
Objective:To provide information of material selection for the chair-side restoration of the teeth after root canal treatment.
Pulpal and periapical diseases are the main causes of tooth loss. Root canal treatment (RCT) is the only effective way to treat these diseases. However, failure of RCT is commonly seen without coronal restoration.Endocrown is a new type of onlay with a retainer in the pulp cavity which consists of a cervical margin in the form of a butt joint and a preparation of the pulp chamber.This restoration method is not only good at the preservation of residual tooth tissue, but also suitable for severely damaged molars or premolars after dental pulp treatment.More and more endondontist tend to use this ways because they are a minimally invasive solution in such cases.Endocrown is mainly made of glass-ceramics, which has the advantages of beautiful appearance, high hardness and good biocompatibility. However, ceramic materials are brittle and fracturable, and need to be sintered twice in the manufacturing process, which is relatively complex and time-consuming. Composite resin block material is a new type of composite material developed in recent years. It is used for chairside CAD/CAM restoration,It has beautiful and natural color, and its elastic modulus is close to dentin. Therefore, it is more compatible with natural teeth in performance.Moreover, In the process of making, the steps of secondary sintering and glazing are omitted and shortened. But, there was no sufficient data to verify which material was more effective. The main aim of this trial is to compare the clinical efficacy of ceramic vs resin-based bloc endocrown. Other objectives include looking for the prognostic and influence factors of the related effects.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resin bloc endocrown | Active Comparator | composite-based blocs (Grandio Blocs, VOCO) |
|
| Ceramic endocrown | Active Comparator | glass ceramic zirconia enhanced lithium silicate glass ceramics (Suprinity, VITA) |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resin blocs (Grandio Blocs, VOCO) | Device | composite-base bloc (Grandio Blocs, VOCO) |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Marginal Adaptation | FDI criteria for dental restorations assessment(2010) This criteria 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. | 2 years |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Fracture of material and retention: | Clinical evaluations were performed at baseline and 24 months according to FDI criteria by 2 independent evaluators. A: Intact; B: Crack apparent on transillumination; C: Fracture observable; D: Endocrown lost (state at which interface debond occurred). | 2 years |
| wear |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wenjuan Yan, PHD | Contact | 15802018770 | 645613053@qq.com | |
| Buling Wu, PHD | Contact | 02062787149 |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Wenjuan Yan, PHD | Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University | Study Chair |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NanFang Hospital, Southern Medical University | Recruiting | Guangzhou | Guangdong | 510515 | China |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20847997 | Background | 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. J Adhes Dent. 2010 Aug;12(4):259-72. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a19262. | |
| 29055692 | Background |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D014076 | Tooth Diseases |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D009057 | Stomatognathic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Ceramic (Suprinity, VITA) | Device | glass ceramic zirconia enhanced lithium silicate glass ceramics (Suprinity, VITA) |
|
Clinical evaluations were performed at baseline and 24 months according to FDI criteria by 2 independent evaluators. |
| 2 years |
| Recurrence of caries | Clinical evaluations were performed at baseline and 24 months according to FDI criteria by 2 independent evaluators. | 2 years |
| Marquillier T, Domejean S, Le Clerc J, Chemla F, Gritsch K, Maurin JC, Millet P, Perard M, Grosgogeat B, Dursun E. The use of FDI criteria in clinical trials on direct dental restorations: A scoping review. J Dent. 2018 Jan;68:1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.10.007. Epub 2017 Oct 18. |
| 32571397 | Derived | Wang J, Ling Z, Zheng Z, Zheng C, Gai Y, Zeng Y, Zhu X, Chen L, Wu B, Yan W. Clinical efficacy of ceramic versus resin-based composite endocrowns in Chinese adults: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2020 Jun 22;21(1):559. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04506-9. |