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
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Using two different injectable materials in class II cavities to compare functional properties
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| beautiful flow plus x | Experimental | shofu's beauitifil flow plus x is advanced bioactive material with the adaptability of flowable composite and mechanical properities of hybird composite |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gaenial universal injectable | Other | GC Gaenial universal injectable advanced injectable composite with nano sized filler that merge the adaptation of flowable composite and mechanical properties of hybird composite |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Marginal adaptation | T1: 1week T2: 6months T3 12 months | |
| 1- fracture of restoration and retention 2- proximal contact poiont | T(Time) T1:1 week hours beasline T2: 6 months T3:12 months |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nourhan Elsayed Abdelrhman, BDS | Contact | 01111001709 | Khalilnourhan1@gmail.com |
Not provided
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 39945899 | Result | Hancer Sarica S, Arslan S, Balkaya H. Comparison of the 2-year clinical performances of class II restorations using different restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2025 Feb 13;29(2):128. doi: 10.1007/s00784-025-06207-6. | |
| 39653674 | Result | Elderiny HM, Khallaf YS, Akah MM, Hassanein OE. Clinical Evaluation of Bioactive Injectable Resin Composite vs Conventional Nanohybrid Composite in Posterior Restorations: An 18-Month Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2024 Aug 1;25(8):794-802. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3737. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D003731 | Dental Caries |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D017001 | Tooth Demineralization |
| D014076 | Tooth Diseases |
| D009057 | Stomatognathic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| 39410319 | Result | Rajabi H, Denny M, Karagiannopoulos K, Petridis H. Comparison of Flexural Strength and Wear of Injectable, Flowable and Paste Composite Resins. Materials (Basel). 2024 Sep 27;17(19):4749. doi: 10.3390/ma17194749. |
| 35915167 | Result | Neto CCL, das Neves AM, Arantes DC, Sa TCM, Yamauti M, de Magalhaes CS, Abreu LG, Moreira AN. Evaluation of the clinical performance of GIOMERs and comparison with other conventional restorative materials in permanent teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Evid Based Dent. 2022 Aug 1. doi: 10.1038/s41432-022-0281-8. Online ahead of print. |
| 35934807 | Result | Ozer F, Patel R, Yip J, Yakymiv O, Saleh N, Blatz MB. Five-year clinical performance of two fluoride-releasing giomer resin materials in occlusal restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2022 Dec;34(8):1213-1220. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12948. Epub 2022 Aug 7. |
| 36260470 | Result | Deepika U, Sahoo PK, Dash JK, Baliarsingh RR, Ray P, Sharma G. Clinical evaluation of bioactive resin-modified glass ionomer and giomer in restoring primary molars: A randomized, parallel-group, and split-mouth controlled clinical study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2022 Jul-Sep;40(3):288-296. doi: 10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_139_22. |
| Result | 2022. Flowable GIOMER Vs Conventional Flowable Composite For Retention And Prevention Of Caries Recurrence When Used As Sealants For Initially Demineralized Fissures. A Randomized Clinical Trial. Journal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results. (Nov. 2022), 3257 3263 |
| 34564200 | Result | Badr C, Spagnuolo G, Amenta F, Khairallah C, Mahdi SS, Daher E, Battineni G, Baba NZ, Zogheib T, Qasim SSB, Daher T, Chintalapudi N, Zogheib CM. A Two-Year Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Performance of a Nanohybrid Composite Resin to a Flowable Composite Resin. J Funct Biomater. 2021 Sep 9;12(3):51. doi: 10.3390/jfb12030051. |
| 26573239 | Result | Kitasako Y, Sadr A, Burrow MF, Tagami J. Thirty-six month clinical evaluation of a highly filled flowable composite for direct posterior restorations. Aust Dent J. 2016 Sep;61(3):366-73. doi: 10.1111/adj.12387. |
| 26525008 | Result | Kramer N, Reinelt C, Frankenberger R. Ten-year Clinical Performance of Posterior Resin Composite Restorations. J Adhes Dent. 2015 Aug;17(5):433-41. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a35010. |
| 26800647 | Result | Bayraktar Y, Ercan E, Hamidi MM, Colak H. One-year clinical evaluation of different types of bulk-fill composites. J Investig Clin Dent. 2017 May;8(2). doi: 10.1111/jicd.12210. Epub 2016 Jan 22. |