Clinical Assessement of Glazed Versus Polished Lithium Disilicate Crowns in Surface Roughness and Enamel Antagonists Wear

NCT ID: NCT03696849

Last Updated: 2018-10-05

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: UNKNOWN
• Clinical Phase: NA
• Total Enrollment: 28 participants
• Study Classification: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2018-11-30
• Study Completion Date: 2020-01-31

Brief Summary

It is believed that final glazing yields the most acceptable ceramic surfaces in terms of smoothness. However, since reglazing must be performed in a dental laboratory with the use of a thermal furnace, it requires multiple office visits. Repeated firings have a destructive effect on ceramic surfaces and can cause deformation. Conversely, polishing is easy and simple and can be accomplished in a single session.

Conditions

Tooth Decay

Study Design

• Allocation Method: RANDOMIZED
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Primary Study Purpose: TREATMENT
• Blinding Strategy: DOUBLE

Study Groups

glazed emax Press

Group Type: ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

polished emax Press

Intervention Type: OTHER

lithium disilicate glass ceramic crowns subjected to polishing only

Polished emax Press

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

polished emax Press

Intervention Type: OTHER

lithium disilicate glass ceramic crowns subjected to polishing only

Interventions

polished emax Press

lithium disilicate glass ceramic crowns subjected to polishing only

Intervention Type: OTHER

Other Intervention Names

emaxPressable ceramics

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• Patients from 18-50 years old who are able to read and sign the informed consent document.
• Physically and psychologically able to tolerate conventional restorative procedures.
• Have no active periodontal or pulpal diseases, have teeth with good restorations.
• Patients have no temporomandibular disorders.
• Each participant needed a crown on either a first or second premolar or first or second molar in any arch.
• Teeth selected shoud include:

restorability with a crown:root ratio of at least 1:1. presence of an opposing natural tooth which was non-restored or minimally restored.

the presence of two non-restored or minimally restored teeth opposing each other on the same quadrants as the crowned tooth and the opposing to serve as enamel controls. Minimally restored was defined as teeth which have no restoration greater than a Class II amalgam restoration.

• Willing to return for follow-up examinations and evaluation.

Exclusion Criteria

• Patients in the growth stage with partially erupted teeth.
• Patients with poor oral hygiene and motivation.
• Pregnant women.
• Psychiatric problems or unrealistic expectations.
• Lack of opposite occluding dentition in the area intended for restoration.
• Patients with temporomandibular disorders.

• Minimum Eligible Age: 18 Years
• Maximum Eligible Age: 50 Years
• Eligible Sex: ALL
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Sponsors

Cairo University

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Mervat Mourad Rouchdy Farid

assisstant lecturer, fixed prosthodontics department, faculty of oral and dental medicine

Responsibility Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Central Contacts

Mervat Rouchdy, M.D.s

Role: CONTACT

mervatmourad82@gmail.com

01272625020

Lamia Khair Allah

Role: CONTACT

Other Identifiers

CEBD-CU-2018-09-34

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id