Comparison of the Functional Properties of Two Injectable Materials in Posterior Teeth: Randomized Clinical Trial

NCT ID: NCT06894186

Last Updated: 2025-03-25

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

NOT_YET_RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

52 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2025-03-31

Study Completion Date

2026-04-30

Brief Summary

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

Using two different injectable materials in class II cavities to compare functional properties

Detailed Description

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

Conditions

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

Class II Dental Caries Dental Caries Injectable Composite

Study Design

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

Allocation Method

NA

Intervention Model

SINGLE_GROUP

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

beautiful flow plus x

shofu's beauitifil flow plus x is advanced bioactive material with the adaptability of flowable composite and mechanical properities of hybird composite

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Gaenial universal injectable

Intervention Type OTHER

GC Gaenial universal injectable advanced injectable composite with nano sized filler that merge the adaptation of flowable composite and mechanical properties of hybird composite

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Gaenial universal injectable

GC Gaenial universal injectable advanced injectable composite with nano sized filler that merge the adaptation of flowable composite and mechanical properties of hybird composite

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria

* 1-Adult patients (20-50) 2-Good oral hygiene Good oral hygiene (Plaque index ≤2 (Moderate accumulation with plaque in the sulcus)) 3-Patient approval 4-Absence of parafunctional habits and/or bruxism 5-No endodontic treatment or abscess 6- class II either mesial or distal (no MOD cavities)

Exclusion Criteria

* 1\. Systematic disease that may affect participation. 2. Xerostomic patients. 3. Bad oral hygiene (plaque index 2 or 3) 14 4. Heavy smokers 5. Patients undergoing or will start orthodontic treatment 6. Signs and symptoms of irreversible pulpitis.
Minimum Eligible Age

21 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

50 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Future University in Egypt

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Nourhan elsayed

Principal investigator

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Nourhan Elsayed Abdelrhman, BDS

Role: CONTACT

01111001709

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Hancer Sarica S, Arslan S, Balkaya H. Comparison of the 2-year clinical performances of class II restorations using different restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2025 Feb 13;29(2):128. doi: 10.1007/s00784-025-06207-6.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 39945899 (View on PubMed)

Elderiny HM, Khallaf YS, Akah MM, Hassanein OE. Clinical Evaluation of Bioactive Injectable Resin Composite vs Conventional Nanohybrid Composite in Posterior Restorations: An 18-Month Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2024 Aug 1;25(8):794-802. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3737.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 39653674 (View on PubMed)

Rajabi H, Denny M, Karagiannopoulos K, Petridis H. Comparison of Flexural Strength and Wear of Injectable, Flowable and Paste Composite Resins. Materials (Basel). 2024 Sep 27;17(19):4749. doi: 10.3390/ma17194749.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 39410319 (View on PubMed)

Neto CCL, das Neves AM, Arantes DC, Sa TCM, Yamauti M, de Magalhaes CS, Abreu LG, Moreira AN. Evaluation of the clinical performance of GIOMERs and comparison with other conventional restorative materials in permanent teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Evid Based Dent. 2022 Aug 1. doi: 10.1038/s41432-022-0281-8. Online ahead of print.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 35915167 (View on PubMed)

Ozer F, Patel R, Yip J, Yakymiv O, Saleh N, Blatz MB. Five-year clinical performance of two fluoride-releasing giomer resin materials in occlusal restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2022 Dec;34(8):1213-1220. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12948. Epub 2022 Aug 7.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 35934807 (View on PubMed)

Deepika U, Sahoo PK, Dash JK, Baliarsingh RR, Ray P, Sharma G. Clinical evaluation of bioactive resin-modified glass ionomer and giomer in restoring primary molars: A randomized, parallel-group, and split-mouth controlled clinical study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2022 Jul-Sep;40(3):288-296. doi: 10.4103/jisppd.jisppd_139_22.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 36260470 (View on PubMed)

2022. Flowable GIOMER Vs Conventional Flowable Composite For Retention And Prevention Of Caries Recurrence When Used As Sealants For Initially Demineralized Fissures. A Randomized Clinical Trial. Journal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results. (Nov. 2022), 3257 3263

Reference Type RESULT

Badr C, Spagnuolo G, Amenta F, Khairallah C, Mahdi SS, Daher E, Battineni G, Baba NZ, Zogheib T, Qasim SSB, Daher T, Chintalapudi N, Zogheib CM. A Two-Year Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Performance of a Nanohybrid Composite Resin to a Flowable Composite Resin. J Funct Biomater. 2021 Sep 9;12(3):51. doi: 10.3390/jfb12030051.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 34564200 (View on PubMed)

Kitasako Y, Sadr A, Burrow MF, Tagami J. Thirty-six month clinical evaluation of a highly filled flowable composite for direct posterior restorations. Aust Dent J. 2016 Sep;61(3):366-73. doi: 10.1111/adj.12387.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 26573239 (View on PubMed)

Kramer N, Reinelt C, Frankenberger R. Ten-year Clinical Performance of Posterior Resin Composite Restorations. J Adhes Dent. 2015 Aug;17(5):433-41. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a35010.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 26525008 (View on PubMed)

Bayraktar Y, Ercan E, Hamidi MM, Colak H. One-year clinical evaluation of different types of bulk-fill composites. J Investig Clin Dent. 2017 May;8(2). doi: 10.1111/jicd.12210. Epub 2016 Jan 22.

Reference Type RESULT
PMID: 26800647 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

Restoring class II cavities

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Comparative Evaluation of Class V Restorations
NCT06164418 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING NA