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
this study aims to compare the clinical performance of hard hybrid ceramics and composite resin indirect restorations fabricated by CAD/CAM technology for the vital teeth with occluso-proximal cavities. the clinical performance assessed include marginal adaptation primarily and in addition to Color match, marginal discoloration, aesthetic anatomic form, recurrent caries and restoration fracture and post-operative hypersensitivity. the clinical performance will be assessed after the restoration cementation, after 6, 12, 18 and 24 months.
A wide variety of materials is now available for the fabrication of indirect restorations used to manage extensive carious lesions, including high-strength ceramics, hybrid ceramics, and resin-composite blocks. Each material offers distinct advantages in strength, wear resistance, aesthetics, and bonding performance, thereby expanding treatment options for severely compromised posterior teeth. However, these differences in mechanical and optical behavior, marginal adaptation, and long-term durability under functional stresses complicate clinical material selection.
Limited data is available comparing the clinical performance of these materials, particularly in large cavities in these regions. More information is needed on how they prevent post-treatment sensitivity, maintain edge quality, and resist discoloration, wear, and fractures.
Though short-term studies indicate excellent survival rates and aesthetic results for CAD/CAM hybrid ceramic inlays (more than 90% survival after two years), and systematic reviews imply that CAD/CAM resin composite inlays match ceramic restorations (success rates ranging from 85.7% to 100% for composites versus 93.3% to 100% for ceramics). There is a lack of direct clinical comparisons between these two material types in vital molars with occluso-proximal cavities. Much of the existing research is constrained to onlay designs or mixed-material groups, creating a significant gap in understanding which CAD/CAM block type delivers superior long-term performance for inlay restorations in vital teeth.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid ceramic group | Experimental | indirect restoration (inlay design) using CAD/CAM Fabricated Hard Hybrid Ceramic blocks |
|
| Composite Resin group | Active Comparator | indirect restoration (inlay design) using CAD/CAM Fabricated from Composite Resin Blocks |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| hybrid ceramics | Other | after caries removal, inlay cavity preparation and immediate dentin sealing, the cavities were scanned using intraoral scanner and the restoration designed and milled using Hard Hybrid Ceramic Blocks. the intaglio surface was air-abraded with 50 μm Al2O3 for 10-15 seconds. SHOFU HC Primer will be applied to the hybrid-ceramic group. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Marginal Adaptation | measured using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria scored as Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta (Alpha score is the best and Delta is the worst). | -baseline (after the restoration cementation) -6 months after restoration cementation -12 months after restoration cementation -18 months after restoration cementation -24 months after restoration cementation |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| color match | measured using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria scored as Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta (Alpha score is the best and Delta is the worst). | -baseline (after the restoration cementation) -6 months after restoration cementation -12 months after restoration cementation -18 months after restoration cementation -24 months after restoration cementation |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 39122602 | Background | Tennert C, Maliakal C, Suarez Machado L, Jaeggi T, Meyer-Lueckel H, Wierichs Richard J. Longevity of posterior direct versus indirect composite restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dent Mater. 2024 Nov;40(11):e95-e101. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2024.07.033. Epub 2024 Aug 9. | |
| 37542639 | Background |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Composite resin | Other | after caries removal, inlay cavity preparation and immediate dentin sealing, the cavities were scanned using intraoral scanner and the restoration designed and milled using Composite Resin Blocks. the intaglio surface was air-abraded with 50 μm Al2O3 for 10-15 seconds. |
|
| marginal discoloration | measured using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria scored as Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta (Alpha score is the best and Delta is the worst). | -baseline (after the restoration cementation) -6 months after restoration cementation -12 months after restoration cementation -18 months after restoration cementation -24 months after restoration cementation |
| aesthetic anatomic form | measured using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria scored as Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta (Alpha score is the best and Delta is the worst). | -baseline (after the restoration cementation) -6 months after restoration cementation -12 months after restoration cementation -18 months after restoration cementation -24 months after restoration cementation |
| recurrent caries | measured using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria scored as Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta (Alpha score is the best and Delta is the worst). | -baseline (after the restoration cementation) -6 months after restoration cementation -12 months after restoration cementation -18 months after restoration cementation -24 months after restoration cementation |
| restoration fracture | measured using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria scored as Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta (Alpha score is the best and Delta is the worst). | -baseline (after the restoration cementation) -6 months after restoration cementation -12 months after restoration cementation -18 months after restoration cementation -24 months after restoration cementation |
| Post-operative hypersensitivity | measured using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria scored as Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta (Alpha score is the best and Delta is the worst). | -baseline (after the restoration cementation) -6 months after restoration cementation -12 months after restoration cementation -18 months after restoration cementation -24 months after restoration cementation |
| Hassan A, Hamdi K, Ali AI, Al-Zordk W, Mahmoud SH. Clinical performance comparison between lithium disilicate and hybrid resin nano-ceramic CAD/CAM onlay restorations: a two-year randomized clinical split-mouth study. Odontology. 2024 Apr;112(2):601-615. doi: 10.1007/s10266-023-00841-w. Epub 2023 Aug 5. |
| 35320383 | Background | Fathy H, Hamama HH, El-Wassefy N, Mahmoud SH. Clinical performance of resin-matrix ceramic partial coverage restorations: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig. 2022 May;26(5):3807-3822. doi: 10.1007/s00784-022-04449-2. Epub 2022 Mar 23. |
| 31642587 | Background | Coskun E, Aslan YU, Ozkan YK. Evaluation of two different CAD-CAM inlay-onlays in a split-mouth study: 2-year clinical follow-up. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2020 Mar;32(2):244-250. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12541. Epub 2019 Oct 23. |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D003731 | Dental Caries |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D017001 | Tooth Demineralization |
| D014076 | Tooth Diseases |
| D009057 | Stomatognathic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D003188 | Composite Resins |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D012117 | Resins, Synthetic |
| D010969 | Plastics |
| D011108 | Polymers |
| D046911 | Macromolecular Substances |
| D003764 | Dental Materials |
| D001697 | Biomedical and Dental Materials |
| D008420 | Manufactured Materials |
| D013676 | Technology, Industry, and Agriculture |
Not provided
Not provided