Injectable Resin Composite Versus Dual-cured Resin Cement for Cementation of Indirect Onlay Restorations
NCT ID: NCT05954156
Last Updated: 2025-04-13
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
28 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2023-08-01
2025-02-28
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Although resin cement is still the gold standard luting agent for the cementation of all indirect restoration, it lacks some properties that may be available in the restorative resin composite such as higher filler loading, higher mechanical properties and wear resistance.
may have been the first to propose the use of restorative, flowable resin composite as a luting agent for ceramic inlays. These authors demonstrated that with respect to polymerization rate, there were no advantages of dual curing-resin compared to light curing only. In addition, the overall handling of the light-curing flowable restorative resin composite was judged to be easier than that of the dual cured material. The same conclusions were drawn by Kramer and franken Berger who added that less luting resin composite overhangs were found with the light polymerized composite-resin because the clinician has more time for excess removal prior to polymerization. The claimed further potential advantages of using restorative rein composite as a luting agent is their resistance to wear which proved to be superior to resin cements
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Clinical Assessment of Indirect Restoration Fabricated From Nano Hybrid Composite Blocks Versus Ceramic Blocks in Badly Broken Teeth One Year Follow up
NCT04563624
Comparing Between Two Different Restoration
NCT05556551
Aesthetic Performance of Two Injectable Resin Composites in Class V Cavities: A Randomized Clinical Trial
NCT06950762
Follow-up of Indirect Restorations Luted With Different Adhesive Resin Cement
NCT05551481
Clinical Evaluation of Self- Cure Bulk-Fill Resin Composite Versus Conventional Bulk-Fill Resin Composite Versus Conventional Bulk-Fill Resin Composite Clinical Evaluation of Self- Cure Bulk-Fill Resin Composite Versus Conventional Bulk-Fill Resin Composite
NCT06859086
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
the author conducted a study to evaluate the performance of two different adhesive resin cement systems in the cementation of inlay/onlay restorations produced from resin nanoceramic blocks using the CAD/CAM system. The methodology was total of 70 inlay/onlay restorations made from Cerasmart (GC, Tokyo, Japan) resin nanoceramic blocks using CEREC Omnicam (Sirona Dental, Bensheim, Germany) were placed in 53 patients. The restorations were cemented with RelyX U200 Automix (3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) self-adhesive resin cement (RXU) after selective enamel etching or with G-CEM LinkForce (GC, Tokyo, Japan) adhesive resin cement (GCL) in combination with a universal adhesive (G-Premio Bond) in selective etch mode. At baseline and after 6, 12, and 18 months, restorations were examined by two calibrated clinicians according to modified USPHS criteria. . he concluded that the two resin cement systems showed acceptable clinical performance for the cementation of resin nanoceramic CEREC Omnicam inlay
the author conducted a study to evaluate the retention strength of zirconia crowns luted with two types of resin cement under environmental pressure changes.Thirty zirconia crowns were fabricated by using computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) system and were cemented by Panavia F2.0 (PAN), hand-mixed RelyX Unicem (UNH), or auto-mix RelyX Unicem Aplicap (UNA) cements on the corresponding extracted human molars. The samples were randomly divided into three groups according to the cement type. After 3000 thermal cycles, the cemented crowns were subjected to 24 pressure cycles (0 to 5 atmospheres). The retention force (N) of the specimens was measured in a universal testing machine. To normalize the retentive force, the recorded force was divided by the surface area of each tooth for measuring the retentive strength (MPa). he concluded that. The adhesive failure mode was predominant in all the groups.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Injectable restorative resin composite material used for cementation
Highly filled injectable composites display properties in a manner similar to resin cements due to their unique viscosities. This with the added benefits of higher filler content, thus improved mechanical and physical properties with the easy placement and handling properties which can improve clinical performance and durability of indirect restorations. (Fugimoto et al., 2019)
Injectable restorative resin composite
The introduction of injectable composites, according to available literature, offers a simple and efficient solution for the cementation of veneers. This versatile, injectable restorative composite unites easy handling, high physical properties and excellent aesthetics. Generally used as a restorative material, it can also be used for the cementation of veneers and some inlays/onlays, thus considered as good alternative to preheated composite. (Alajrash MM et al., 2020)
Dual cured resin cement
Dual cured resin cement is chosen as a comparator (gold standard )for the cementation of indirect restorations. (Sadighpour et al., 2018) Resin cement is insoluble and has superior mechanical and physical properties, compared with other previous luting materials. The clinical advantages of resin cement include high resistance to compression forces, low thermal expansion coefficients, high flexural strengths, and hardness. In addition, resin cement is characterized by adhesion to many materials, the ability to modify shade and color, high retention, resistance to wear at the margin of the restoration, and low marginal permeability. Resin cement provides optimal bond with resin composite indirect restorations and evenly distributes the compression force along all contact surfaces. (Gurdal et al., 2018
Dual cured resin cement
Resin cements are widely used due to their strong adhesion, and compatibility with various restorative materials, including ceramics and zirconia. They bond to enamel and dentin through functional monomers such as MDP, and 4-META, forming a stable hybrid layer. Based on their bonding mechanism, resin cements are classified as adhesive or self-adhesive, while their polymerization method -chemical, light, or dual-cure-allows for versatility in clinical applications
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Injectable restorative resin composite
The introduction of injectable composites, according to available literature, offers a simple and efficient solution for the cementation of veneers. This versatile, injectable restorative composite unites easy handling, high physical properties and excellent aesthetics. Generally used as a restorative material, it can also be used for the cementation of veneers and some inlays/onlays, thus considered as good alternative to preheated composite. (Alajrash MM et al., 2020)
Dual cured resin cement
Resin cements are widely used due to their strong adhesion, and compatibility with various restorative materials, including ceramics and zirconia. They bond to enamel and dentin through functional monomers such as MDP, and 4-META, forming a stable hybrid layer. Based on their bonding mechanism, resin cements are classified as adhesive or self-adhesive, while their polymerization method -chemical, light, or dual-cure-allows for versatility in clinical applications
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Patients with at least 20 teeth under occlusion.
* Age: 20-40 years.
* Males or females.
* Co-operative patients approving to participate in the trial.
* Good oral hygiene measures
* Teeth with no signs of pulpal involvement; healthy periodontal status; favorable occlusion
* Those in good general health.
Exclusion Criteria
* Teeth supporting removable prostheses, or orthodontic appliances.
* Candidates with parafunction or bruxism or temporomandibular joint disorders
* Candidates with systemic diseases or disabilities that may affect participation.
* Heavy smoking.
* Pregnancy.
* Lack of compliance.
* Severe or active periodontal disease
* Non-vital or endodontically treated teeth
* Xerostomia
* Drug addiction; or any condition that could compromise study compliance.
22 Years
40 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Cairo University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Hamsa Ashraf Abd El Menam
assistant lecturer
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Faculty of Dentistry Cairo University
Cairo, , Egypt
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Ashraf H, El Tannir A, El Zohairy A, Kamal D. Clinical performance of indirect hybrid ceramic onlay restorations cemented with injectable resin composite versus dual-cure resin cement: an 18-month randomized clinical trial. BMC Oral Health. 2025 Sep 23;25(1):1419. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-06903-5.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IRS_DCRC
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.