Skip to content

Comparison of two restoration techniques for molar teeth affected with hypominerlization

Longevity Of Resin Restorations with and without Deproteinization for MIH Affected First Permanent Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2019/03/018005
Enrollment
40
Registered
2019-03-08
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2021-11-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Interventions

Intervention1: Restoration of MIH affected teeth with depreoteinization using 5% sodium hypochlorite for pretreatment of etched enamel: Restoration of MIH affected teeth with depreoteinization using 5

Sponsors

PGIMER Chandigarh
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1.Children in the age range of 8 to 14 years with vital MIH affected (Moderate/Severe) FPMs with/without post eruptive breakdown and with/without dental caries requiring restorations involving two surfaces 2.MIH affected FPMs as described above and previously restored but requiring replacement of the restoration

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. FPMs affected by MIH requiring extensive restoration in the form of onlays or full coverage crowns 2. MIH affected FPMs with isolated demarcated opacities on the buccal, lingual or proximal surfaces 3. Non-vital FPMs with radiographic evidence of pulpal/periapical disease 4. Children with mental retardation and other systemic diseases 5. Severely broken coronal tooth structure with an uncertain prognosis 6. Children with teeth affected by other forms of hypomineralization defects

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
the retention of the composite restorations placed on MIH affected FPMs using two different techniquesTimepoint: 3 months, 6 months, 1 year

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
1. To compare and evaluate the resin restorations in terms of marginal integrity, anatomic form, fracture of the restoration and development of secondary caries 2. To compare and evaluate the biological success of the restorations (gingivitis, gingival recession, plaque accumulation) 3. To compare and evaluate the radiographic success of the restorations in terms of periapical changes, marginal integrity , secondary caries Timepoint: 3 months, 6 months, 1 year

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactMrinalini Rathore

PGIMER, Chandigarh

ashimapgi@yahoo.in9815067018

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026