Clinical Evaluation of Direct and Indirect Composites

Study Results

Results pending

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.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

90 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2023-03-16

Study Completion Date

2025-11-01

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The most commonly used materials in the treatment of decayed teeth are amalgam and composite resins. Because amalgam cannot meet the aesthetic expectations of patients and the rapidly increasing belief that it is toxic, its use has decreased considerably. Although composite resins are primarily used in anterior teeth because they provide aesthetically satisfactory results, they have also become the most preferred material in posterior teeth. This shift is largely due to the significant advancements in their mechanical properties, such as improved strength and durability. Indirect restorations have begun to be used to overcome the disadvantages of resin composites applied with the direct method. Both composite resins and ceramics have given good results for such restorations. However, composite resins have the advantage of being cheaper, more user-friendly, and repairable than ceramics. Laboratory-prepared composite inlays/onlays are more wear-resistant than direct composites, especially in occlusal contact areas. Therefore, they are generally indicated for the restoration of large cavities. Considering the material loss caused by crown restorations and the disadvantages of direct composites in the treatment of teeth with extensive caries, we aimed to treat indirect resin composites that we can apply by making more minimally invasive preparations while supporting the dental tissues.

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Clinical Comparison of Restorative Materials

NCT06637605

Dental Caries

ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING

Clinical Evaluation of Posterior Indirect Adhesive Restorations

NCT04293770

Dental Caries Endodontically Treated Teeth Dental Restoration Failure of Marginal Integrity +2 more

UNKNOWN NA

Retrospective Evaluation of Posterior Direct Restorations

NCT04827823

Dental Caries Class II

COMPLETED

Clinical Comparison of Composite Materials

NCT06058026

Caries; Dentin

COMPLETED

Injectable Resin Composite Versus Dual-cured Resin Cement for Cementation of Indirect Onlay Restorations

NCT05954156

Cementation Teeth Badly Broken Down Vital Teeth

COMPLETED NA

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

This study was a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial involving both evaluators and patients. The research compared indirect restorations with direct restorations. Patients receiving treatment were recalled for follow-ups after one week, six months, and twelve months. Restorations were assessed clinically based on modified FDI criteria, which included marginal discoloration, color match, anatomical form, fracture and retention, marginal adaptation, contact point, postoperative sensitivity, secondary caries, and periodontal response. Qualified clinicians conducted the evaluations using a mirror and probe under reflector light. Additionally, bite-wing radiographs were obtained from patients during the 6-month and 12-month follow-ups to assess the development of secondary caries. Differences between adhesives at each time point were analyzed using Fisher's Exact test, while the effect of time on restorations was evaluated with the Wilcoxon Signed Rank test (p \< 0.05).

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Dental Caries

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

CASE_CONTROL

Study Time Perspective

PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* They have been informed about the study and have agreed to participate.
* They are over 18 years old.
* They do not have any systemic diseases.
* They maintain good general oral health.
* They are not pregnant or breastfeeding.
* The relevant tooth is vital, and the decay is at least 0.5 mm away from the pulp, as confirmed by radiographic findings.
* There is a tooth in contact with the relevant tooth and an antagonist tooth.
* They have agreed to attend follow-up appointments.

Exclusion Criteria

* After being informed about the study, the participant declined to participate.
* The individual is under 18 years of age.
* The volunteer has a severe systemic disease.
* They have active periodontal or pulp disease.
* They have received endodontic treatment.
* They experience bruxism.

Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes