Skip to content

Zirconia Versus Lithium Di-silicate Overlays for Restoring Hypomineralized Molars Affected With MIH

Clinical Outcome of Zirconia Versus Lithium Di-silicate Overlays Restorations for Restoring Vital Young Permanent First Molar Teeth Affected With Moderate Form of Molar Incisor Hypomineralization: Randomized Clinical Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05529329
Enrollment
52
Registered
2022-09-07
Start date
2021-04-01
Completion date
2022-08-20
Last updated
2023-02-03

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

Conditions

Molar Incisor Hypomineralization

Keywords

MIH - zironia - Lithium Disilicate - Overlays

Brief summary

the study evaluate the clinical outcome of zirconia versus lithium disilicate overlays restorations for restoring vital young permanent first molar teeth affected with moderate form of molar Incisor hypomineralization: randomized clinical trial.

Detailed description

To compare the one-year clinical outcome of zirconia versus lithium disilicate overlays restorations. Materials and methods: Twenty patients were distributed into two groups in relation to the material used for the fabrication of overlays restorations; group (Z) (n=10): patients received zirconia restorations, group (EC): patients received IPS E.max Cad restorations. Clinical and radiographic evaluations of these restorations were carried out at base line (1 week), 3, 6 and 12 months after cementation using FDI World Dental Federation criteria

Interventions

PROCEDUREoverlay

Lithium Disilicate partial coverage of hypo-mineralized defected enamel

Sponsors

Al-Azhar University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Outcomes Assessor)

Intervention model description

Randomized Clinical Trial

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
7 Years to 12 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Children's age ranging from 10 to 15 years old. * Existence of large carious lesion in young permanent first molar teeth associated with weak cusps. * Signs of vital pulp without symptoms of pulpitis. * Presence of antagonists and adjacent teeth and occlusal contacts with good level of oral hygiene. * Children should be able to physically and psychologically tolerate conventional restorative procedures.

Exclusion criteria

* Children with poor oral hygiene and symptoms of pulpitis. * Children suffer from parafunctional habits. * Children with any debilitating systemic disorder.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Clinical Outcomeone yearcompare the one-year clinical outcome of zirconia versus lithium disilicate overlays restoration of vital young permanent first molar teeth affected with moderate form of Molar Incisor Hypomineralization
Restoration Evaluationone yearRestorations were assessed clinically using dental explorer, mirror and radiographically according to FDI World Dental Federation criteria over one-year period at (base line 1 week, 3, 6 and 12 months) afterward cementation. There were three assessment categories (esthetics, function, biological) each with five subcategories. From best to worst, the subcategories were: (1) clinically excellent, (2) clinically good, (3) clinically sufficient, (4) clinically not sufficient but repairable and (5) clinically unacceptable. Assessment with category (5) was rated as a clinical failure. Statistical analysis for baseline and follow-up criteria was performed with Wilcoxon-Test (p\<0.05) (SPSS; IBM,Chicago, IL).

Countries

Egypt

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026