Zirconia Versus Lithium Di-silicate Overlays for Restoring Hypomineralized Molars Affected With MIH
- Conditions
- Molar Incisor Hypomineralization
- Registration Number
- NCT05529329
- Lead Sponsor
- Al-Azhar University
- 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 
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 52
- 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.
- Children with poor oral hygiene and symptoms of pulpitis.
- Children suffer from parafunctional habits.
- Children with any debilitating systemic disorder.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Primary Outcome Measures
- Name - Time - Method - Restoration Evaluation - one year - Restorations 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). - Clinical Outcome - one year - compare 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
- Secondary Outcome Measures
- Name - Time - Method 
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
- Al-Azhar University 🇪🇬- Cairo, Naser City, Egypt Al-Azhar University🇪🇬Cairo, Naser City, Egypt
