Discoloration, Tooth
Conditions
Brief summary
Restoration of anterior teeth using conservative approach allows clinicians to provide porcelain laminate veneers with excellent esthetics without extensive tooth structure removal. laminate veneers need the use of etch-able ceramics like glass ceramics (E.max) and hybrid ceramics (Lava Ultimate). The aim of this study is to compare both e.max and lava ultimate veneers clinically.
Detailed description
The use of E-max CAD well documented in the literatures as successful restoration modality which has superior optical and mechanical properties. The introduction of hybrid ceramic materials combined the advantages of both glass ceramics and composite resin. Resin nano-ceramic is a mixture of a resin composite matrix and nano-ceramic fillers of approximately 80% by weight. The main advantages of this material over the glass ceramics are the stress absorbing action or stress distribution by having modulus of elasticity near to the tooth dentin and can be individualized intra-orally or extra-orally, either before or after definitive cementation. Yet there are no studies for clinical evaluation of both mentioned laminate veneers restorations. This study is conducted to compare between both materials clinically according to modified USPHS criteria in terms of marginal adaptation, fracture, debonding, marginal discoloration and patient satisfaction.
Interventions
OTHERlava ultimate
resin nano ceramic material
OTHERE.max cad
Lithium disilicate glass ceramic
Sponsors
Cairo University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)
Masking description
double blinded
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 50 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
1. From 18-50 years old, be able to read and sign the informed consent document. 2. Be physically and psychologically able to tolerate conventional restorative procedures. 3. Have no active periodontal or pulpal diseases, have teeth with good restorations. 4. Patients with teeth problems indicated for laminate veneer (e.g. discoloration, defect not involve more than 60% enamel loss, mild malposition, anterior upper….). 5. Be willing to return for follow-up examinations and evaluation.
Exclusion criteria
1. Patients in the growth stage with partially erupted teeth. 2. Patient with fractured teeth of more than 60% enamel loss. 3. Patients with poor oral hygiene and motivation. 4. Pregnant women. 5. Psychiatric problems or unrealistic expectations. 6. Lack of opposite occluding dentition in the area intended for restoration.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Patient satisfaction evaluated by using a questionnaire | one year | Patient satisfaction will be evaluated by using a questionnaire, which will be translated. A validation of the Arabic translation will be done before using the questionnaire in the trial. Each participant will take the questionnaire into a quiet room and will be left alone until questionnaire is totally answered. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Modified USPHS criteria | one year | It is a criteria for clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials in terms of marginal adaptation, marginal discoloration, fracture, debonding. |
Contacts
Primary Contactmai elgendi, B.D.S
Backup Contactkareem abo bakr, PHD
Outcome results
None listed