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

Al-Azhar University52 enrolled

Overview

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.

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

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

TRIPLE

Enrollment

Conditions

Molar Incisor Hypomineralization

Interventions

overlayPROCEDURE

Lithium Disilicate partial coverage of hypo-mineralized defected enamel

Eligibility

Sex: ALLMin age: 7 YearsMax age: 12 Years

Medical Language ↔ Plain English

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.

Locations (1)

Al-Azhar University

Cairo, Naser City, Egypt

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Clinical Outcome

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

Time frame: one year

Restoration Evaluation

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).

Time frame: one year

Data from ClinicalTrials.gov

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