Performance Of Class I Composite Restorations After Cavity Finishing By Air Abrasion Versus Diamond Stone
NCT ID: NCT06107218
Last Updated: 2023-11-18
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.
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
78 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2023-11-30
2025-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Clinical Evaluation of Bioactive Resin Composites Versus Caries Control Technique in Management of Class I Carious Cavities in High Caries Risk Patients: a Randomized Clinical Trial
NCT06797843
Clinical Performance of Bioactive Restorative Material Versus Glass Hybrid Restorative in Posterior Restorations
NCT03608306
Bioactive Versus Non-Bioactive Restorative System in Deep Carious Molars
NCT06348953
Clinical Performance of Dual- and Light-cure Bulk-fill Resin Composites
NCT06137989
Clinical Performance of Short Fiber Reinforced Flowable Resin Composite Restorations 2y RCT
NCT04720638
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Different particles could be incorporated into air abrasion devices according to the intended use of them, such as aluminum oxide (alumina), Calcium Sodium Phosphosilicate (Biactive Glass) and Sodium bicarbonate. To obtain maximum cutting efficiency, the particle should be hard enough to indent the substrate it abrades, and irregular in shape with a sharp cutting edge. Round and smooth particles possess poor abrasive properties, so it may be used for polishing needs "air- polishing". Increased air pressure provided an increased number and velocity of the particles. Abrading power must be proportional to kinetic energy of the particles, which is the function of mass and velocity of the particle. The cutting efficiency of air abrasion depends on several criteria, such as: size, shape, hardness, density of the particles and air pressure.
Aluminum oxide (alumina) are the most abrasive type of particles used. They are irregular in shape with different particle sizes. Intraoral sandblasting with alumina particles (Al2O3) was first described in 1945 by Black. Initially, it was reported that the bond strength to the tooth surface improved, also confirmed by recent investigations, and some authors adopted its use in clinical procedures even after preparing the cavity with rotating instrument. A bioactive glass abrasive, is also commercially available but indicated for the purpose of tooth polishing. Some work has also showed potential for it to have selective cutting properties. However, its cutting time can take 2-3 times longer than alumina, making it clinically indicated for cavity finishing and not cutting.
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
TRIPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Diamond Stone group (Comparator)
Class I cavities will be finished using 20-30 μm grit extra fine (EF) yellow coded diamond stone with maximum rotational speed 300,000 min -1.
Diamond Stone.
Finishing of cavity walls using Diamond Stone.
Bioactive Glass Air Abrasion group (Intervention)
Class I cavities will be finished by AquaCare Air Abrasion Device using bioactive glass air-abrasion particles (a mix of 30-60-90 μm particles). The nozzle of the air abrasion device will be 0.6 in diameter and angulated at 90° to the occlusal surface with a distance away from the tooth about 2-3 mm. The device will be used in a dynamic motion with 60 psi (4 Bar) adjusted pressure for 3 seconds.
Bioactive Glass Air Abrasion Particles.
Finishing of cavity walls by AquaCare Air Abrasion Device using Bioactive Glass Air Abrasion Particles.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Bioactive Glass Air Abrasion Particles.
Finishing of cavity walls by AquaCare Air Abrasion Device using Bioactive Glass Air Abrasion Particles.
Diamond Stone.
Finishing of cavity walls using Diamond Stone.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Absence of abnormal occlusion habits (e.g. bruxism, nail biting, tooth clenching and mouth breathing).
* Patients approving to participate in the study.
Exclusion Criteria
* Systematic disease that may affect participation.
* Xerostomic patients.
25 Years
45 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.
Mahmoud Essam Mahmoud
Principal Investigator
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Huang CT, Kim J, Arce C, Lawson NC. Intraoral Air Abrasion: A Review of Devices, Materials, Evidence, and Clinical Applications in Restorative Dentistry. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2019 Sep;40(8):508-513; quiz 514.
Paolinelis G, Banerjee A, Watson TF. An in vitro investigation of the effect and retention of bioactive glass air-abrasive on sound and carious dentine. J Dent. 2008 Mar;36(3):214-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2007.12.004. Epub 2008 Jan 30.
Banerjee A, Pabari H, Paolinelis G, Thompson ID, Watson TF. An in vitro evaluation of selective demineralised enamel removal using bio-active glass air abrasion. Clin Oral Investig. 2011 Dec;15(6):895-900. doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0470-2. Epub 2010 Oct 13.
Banerjee A, Thompson ID, Watson TF. Minimally invasive caries removal using bio-active glass air-abrasion. J Dent. 2011 Jan;39(1):2-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2010.09.004. Epub 2010 Oct 1.
Milly H, Austin RS, Thompson I, Banerjee A. In vitro effect of air-abrasion operating parameters on dynamic cutting characteristics of alumina and bio-active glass powders. Oper Dent. 2014 Jan-Feb;39(1):81-9. doi: 10.2341/12-466-L. Epub 2013 May 29.
Lynch CD, Opdam NJ, Hickel R, Brunton PA, Gurgan S, Kakaboura A, Shearer AC, Vanherle G, Wilson NH; Academy of Operative Dentistry European Section. Guidance on posterior resin composites: Academy of Operative Dentistry - European Section. J Dent. 2014 Apr;42(4):377-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2014.01.009. Epub 2014 Jan 22.
da Rosa Rodolpho PA, Cenci MS, Donassollo TA, Loguercio AD, Demarco FF. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings. J Dent. 2006 Aug;34(7):427-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2005.09.006. Epub 2005 Nov 28.
Hofsteenge JW, Scholtanus JD, Ozcan M, Nolte IM, Cune MS, Gresnigt MMM. Clinical longevity of extensive direct resin composite restorations after amalgam replacement with a mean follow-up of 15 years. J Dent. 2023 Mar;130:104409. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104409. Epub 2023 Jan 6.
Hardan L, Sidawi L, Akhundov M, Bourgi R, Ghaleb M, Dabbagh S, Sokolowski K, Cuevas-Suarez CE, Lukomska-Szymanska M. One-Year Clinical Performance of the Fast-Modelling Bulk Technique and Composite-Up Layering Technique in Class I Cavities. Polymers (Basel). 2021 Jun 4;13(11):1873. doi: 10.3390/polym13111873.
Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Mattar D, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P. Microtensile bond strengths of an etch&rinse and self-etch adhesive to enamel and dentin as a function of surface treatment. Oper Dent. 2003 Sep-Oct;28(5):647-60.
Graumann SJ, Sensat ML, Stoltenberg JL. Air polishing: a review of current literature. J Dent Hyg. 2013 Aug;87(4):173-80.
Bendinskaite R, Peciuliene V, Brukiene V. A five years clinical evaluation of sealed occlusal surfaces of molars. Stomatologija. 2010;12(3):87-92.
Cvar JF, Ryge G. Reprint of criteria for the clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials. 1971. Clin Oral Investig. 2005 Dec;9(4):215-32. doi: 10.1007/s00784-005-0018-z. No abstract available.
Hickel R, Roulet JF, Bayne S, Heintze SD, Mjor IA, Peters M, Rousson V, Randall R, Schmalz G, Tyas M, Vanherle G. Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials. Science Committee Project 2/98--FDI World Dental Federation study design (Part I) and criteria for evaluation (Part II) of direct and indirect restorations including onlays and partial crowns. J Adhes Dent. 2007;9 Suppl 1:121-47.
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.
Hickel R, Mesinger S, Opdam N, Loomans B, Frankenberger R, Cadenaro M, Burgess J, Peschke A, Heintze SD, Kuhnisch J. Revised FDI criteria for evaluating direct and indirect dental restorations-recommendations for its clinical use, interpretation, and reporting. Clin Oral Investig. 2023 Jun;27(6):2573-2592. doi: 10.1007/s00784-022-04814-1. Epub 2022 Dec 12.
Martinez-Insua A, Da Silva Dominguez L, Rivera FG, Santana-Penin UA. Differences in bonding to acid-etched or Er:YAG-laser-treated enamel and dentin surfaces. J Prosthet Dent. 2000 Sep;84(3):280-8. doi: 10.1067/mpr.2000.108600.
Turkistani A, Almutairi M, Banakhar N, Rubehan R, Mugharbil S, Jamleh A, Nasir A, Bakhsh T. Optical Evaluation of Enamel Microleakage with One-Step Self-Etch Adhesives. Photomed Laser Surg. 2018 Nov;36(11):589-594. doi: 10.1089/pho.2018.4441. Epub 2018 May 29.
Torres CRG, Mailart MC, Crastechini E, Feitosa FA, Esteves SRM, Di Nicolo R, Borges AB. A randomized clinical trial of class II composite restorations using direct and semidirect techniques. Clin Oral Investig. 2020 Feb;24(2):1053-1063. doi: 10.1007/s00784-019-02999-6. Epub 2019 Jul 9.
Nemt-Allah AA, Ibrahim SH, El-Zoghby AF. Marginal Integrity of Composite Restoration with and without Surface Pretreatment by Gold and Silver Nanoparticles vs Chlorhexidine: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2021 Oct 1;22(10):1087-1097.
Paula EA, Tay LY, Kose C, Mena-Serrano A, Reis A, Perdigao J, Loguercio AD. Randomized clinical trial of four adhesion strategies in cervical lesions: 12-month results. Int J Esthet Dent. 2015 Spring;10(1):122-145.
Perdigao J, Kose C, Mena-Serrano AP, De Paula EA, Tay LY, Reis A, Loguercio AD. A new universal simplified adhesive: 18-month clinical evaluation. Oper Dent. 2014 Mar-Apr;39(2):113-27. doi: 10.2341/13-045-C. Epub 2013 Jun 26.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Air Abrasion in Finishing
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.