Restorative Treatment of Severe Tooth Wear; Direct vs Indirect

Radboud University Medical Center42 enrolled

Overview

This study compares the survival rates of both direct and indirect resin-based composite restorations in the treatment of severe tooth wear.

Tooth wear can lead to pain, discomfort and unsatisfying dental attractiveness and when severe, it can compromise the dentition's prognosis. Restorative therapies for treatment of severe tooth wear should be preferably minimally invasive and adhesive. This study compares two different treatment techniques for severe tooth wear. The first technique is regarded as the 'standard' technique. This is a full rehabilitation using only direct composite restorations (AP-X, Kuraray, Japan). The second technique comprises a full rehabilitation using both direct and indirect resin composite restorations (Estenia C\&B, Kuraray, Japan). 10 indirect restorations are placed on specific elements i.e. first molars and palatal sides of all maxillary anterior teeth. Other elements are restored conform the direct protocol. An important benefit for the patients is the rehabilitation of their worn dentitions. Functionality (teeth are less sensitive, improved chewing ability, better occlusal stability, etc) and aesthetics will be improved immediately after finishing the treatment. Indirect techniques have the advantage of a superior control over form of restorations.

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

NONE

Enrollment

Conditions

Tooth Wear Dental Restoration Failure Dental Restoration Wear

Interventions

Rehabilitation of severely worn dentitions using minimally invasive composite restorations (Estenia C&B or Clearfil AP-X, Kuraray, Osaka, Japan)PROCEDURE

Eligibility

Sex: ALLMin age: 18 Years

Medical Language ↔ Plain English

Inclusion Criteria: * Patients age of at least 18 years old. * Generalized moderate to severe tooth wear (Tooth Wear Index (TWI) ≥ 2) with a patient demand for treatment (Smith 1984) * Full dental arches, but one diastema due to one missing tooth in the posterior area was allowed. * An estimated need for increase of vertical dimension of occlusion (VDO) of ≥3mm at the location of the first molars. Exclusion Criteria: * Limited mouth opening (\<3.5cm). * (History of) Temporomandibular dysfunction, periodontitis, deep caries lesions or multiple endodontic problems. * Local or systemic conditions that would contra-indicate dental procedures. Patients with specific individual risk factors, such as parafunctional habits of grinding/clenching or patients with GORD (Gastro Oesophageal Reflex Disease), were not excluded.

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Failure level 1

Number of replaced direct and indirect restorations in the treatment. The higher the number the worse the outcome.

Time frame: Failures 3 years after placement

Failure level 2

Number of repaired direct and indirect restorations in the treatment. The higher the number the worse the outcome.

Time frame: Failures 3 years after placement

Failure level 3

Number of refurbished direct and indirect restorations in the treatment due to material chippings. The higher the number the worse the outcome.

Time frame: Failures 3 years after placement

Data from ClinicalTrials.gov

This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.