Skip to content

Does a Highly Filled Injectable Resin Composite Work Better Alone or in Combination With a Nanohybride Resin Composite?

Does a Highly Filled Injectable Resin Composite Work Better Alone or in Combination With a Nanohybride Resin Composite? A Randomised Clinical Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07267143
Acronym
nanoinjectcomb
Enrollment
45
Registered
2025-12-05
Start date
2024-01-01
Completion date
2025-08-01
Last updated
2025-12-05

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

Conditions

Polydiastema Disorder

Keywords

High filled injectable composite polydiastema disorders

Brief summary

This is a double blinded, randomized clinical study that evaluated the performance of a high filled injectable resin composite in polydiastema . The polydiastema disorders will be restored with high filled injectable resin composite (G'aenial Injectable Universal ) or anterior composite resin (G-aenial A'chord ). Restorations will be evaluated after 12 months according to FDI criteria and the data will be analyzed.

Detailed description

: The aim of this study was to comparatively evaluate the clinical performance of a high filled injectable resin composite with an anterior composite resin (G-aenial A'chord) in polidaiastemas. Participants who are 18 years of age or older and healthy, and who have applied to the Restorative Dentistry Department of Hacettepe University Faculty of Dentistry to receive treatment for polidiastema disorders on their front teeth will be included in the study. After explaining the purpose and conditions of the study, they will be asked to sign an informed consent form. The gender, age, and tooth numbers of the participants to be treated will be recorded. 240 upper incisors of 60 patients will be treated, with attention paid to the balanced distribution of teeth in the right and left arches...Data were will be analyzed with Chi- Square, Fisher's Exact Test, Mann U tests

Interventions

DEVICENanohybrid Composite (G-ænial A'Chord, GC Corp., Tokyo, Japan)

Conventional nanohybrid resin composite (G-ænial A'Chord, GC Corp., Tokyo, Japan) was used for direct anterior veneer restorations. The material was applied using a free-hand layering technique following digital smile design and wax-up. A transparent silicone index (Exaclear, GC Corp.) was used for shape guidance when necessary. The enamel surfaces were etched with 37% phosphoric acid and bonded with a universal adhesive (G2 Bond, GC Corp.) before composite application. This intervention represents the standard clinical technique for direct composite veneers and serves as the active comparator group.

DEVICEHighly Filled Injectable Composite (G-ænial Universal Injectable, GC Corp., Tokyo, Japan)

Highly filled flowable injectable composite resin (G-ænial Universal Injectable, GC Corp., Tokyo, Japan) was used either as a sole restorative material or in combination with a nanohybrid composite for direct anterior veneers. For the injection process, a transparent PVS index (Exaclear, GC Corp.) was fabricated from a wax-up model and used to guide the placement of the material. In the combined technique, a 1-mm palatal layer of nanohybrid composite was placed first, followed by the injection of the flowable composite. The procedure aimed to improve adaptation, minimize voids, and optimize esthetic results compared to the conventional layering method.

Sponsors

Tolunay Aytas
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 35 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Polydiastema should be such that the mesial, distal and buccal surfaces of the tooth are included in the restoration. * 2\. The patient has polydiastema in at least teeth 12, 11, 21 and 22 * 3\. The patient does not have a systemic disease that would prevent restorative treatment. * 4\. The patient voluntarily signs the informed consent form * 5\. The patient does not have a physical disability that may prevent him/her from coming for a check-up. * 6\. The patient does not have a history of spontaneous pain in the teeth to be included. * 7\. The patient's teeth are alive * 8\. The patient does not have any periapical pathology in the relevant tooth. * 9\. The patient's tooth to be included in the study must be in a position to be restored by direct method. * 10\. The patient is between the ages of 18-35 * 11\. The patient has class 1 and class 2 bite

Exclusion criteria

* • 1.Participant must be under 18 years of age or over 35 years of age * 2\. The participant has poor oral hygiene * 3\. The participant has systemic disorders that may prevent regular attendance at treatment and control appointments. * 4\. The participant has parafunctional habits such as clenching/grinding and biting foreign objects. * 5\. Previous diastema closure or reshaping has been performed on the relevant teeth. * 6\. Teeth whitening has been performed on the relevant teeth within the last week. * 6\. Having severe periodontal problems in the relevant tooth * 7\. The relevant tooth has previously been restored due to caries, * 8\. The relevant tooth functions as a removable prosthesis support * 9\. Teeth undergoing orthodontic treatment * 10\. Finding the participant's breakeven and class 3 closure

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Functional properties score1 yearThe primary factor for determining the clinical performance of a restorative material is the Functional properties. Visual tactile examination tools will be used for evaluating restorations according to FDI criteria by two experienced researchers at 1- week 6-, 12- months. The functional properties are scored as 1- clinically excellent, 2- clinically good, 3-clinically sufficient/satisfactory, 4-clinically unsatisfactory 5-clinically poor (replacement necesessry). Clinically 1, 2 and 3 scores are clinical acceptable but 4 and 5 scores are designated as failure. \[Time Frame: 1 year\]
Esthetic properties score1 yearThe secondary factor for determining the clinical performance of a restorative material is the Esthetic properties. Visual examination will be used for evaluating restorations according to FDI criteria by two experienced researchers at 1- week 6-, 12-months. The Esthetic properties are scored as 1- clinically excellent, 2-clinically good, 3-clinically sufficient/satisfactory, 4-clinically unsatisfactory 5-clinically poor (replacement necesessry). Clinically 1, 2 and 3 scores are clinical acceptable but 4 and 5 scores are designated as failure.

Countries

Turkey (Türkiye)

Outcome results

None listed

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