the aim of this study to evaluate and compare the impact of dimethyl sulfoxide dentin surface pretreatment on the performance of composite restorations in non-cervical carious lesions
this clinical trial aimed to evaluate the effect of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) pretreatment on the clinical performance of adhesive restorative procedures performed on dentin under wet-bonding conditions. the study will investigate wither DMSO pretreatment can improve the marginal adaptation and clinical performance of resin composite restorations placed in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCL) participants presenting with eligible non-carious lesions will receive adhesive restorative treatment according to the assigned experimental protocol. different adhesive approaches, including with and without DMSO pretreatment, will be compared. clinical outcomes will be evaluated at predefined follow-up periods using standardized clinical assessment criteria.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
30
application of DMSO as dentin surface pretreatment prior to etch and rinse adhesive and resin composite application
no DMSO pretreatment prior to etch and rinse application and resin composite restoration
Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University
Al Mansurah, Dakahlia Governorate, Egypt
1. FDI criteria score-aesthetic properties (A1 surface luster and surface texture; A2 Marginal staining; A3 color match), Functional (F1 Fracture/Retention; F2 marginal adaptation), biological (B1 caries at restoration margin)
1. Aesthetic properties Restorations will be evaluated for A1 (surface luster and texture), A2 (marginal staining), and A3 (color match). Mean (SD) scores and the proportion of clinically acceptable restorations (scores 1-3) versus unacceptable restorations (scores 4-5) will be reported. Lower scores indicate better clinical performance. 2. Unit of Measure: FDI score Functional properties Restorations will be evaluated for F1 (fracture/retention) and F2 (marginal adaptation). Mean (SD) scores and the proportion of clinically acceptable restorations (scores 1-3) versus unacceptable restorations (scores 4-5) will be reported. Lower scores indicate better clinical performance. 3. Unit of Measure: FDI score Biological properties Restoration assessment of B1 (car
Time frame: Post-restoration baseline (2 weeks), 6, 12, 18, and 24 months
FDI criteria score
1\. FDI criteria score-aesthetic properties (A1 surface luster and surface texture; A2 Marginal staining; A3 color match), Functional (F1 Fracture/Retention; F2 marginal adaptation), biological (B1 caries at restoration margin) 1. Aesthetic properties Restorations will be evaluated for A1 (surface luster and texture), A2 (marginal staining), and A3 (color match). Mean (SD) scores and the proportion of clinically acceptable restorations (scores 1-3) versus unacceptable restorations (scores 4-5) will be reported. Lower scores indicate better clinical performance. 2. Unit of Measure: FDI score Functional properties Restorations will be evaluated for F1 (fracture/retention) and F2 (marginal adaptation). Mean (SD) scores and the proportion of clinically acceptable restorations (scores 1-3) versus unacceptable restorations (scores 4-5) will be reported. Lower scores indicate better clinical performance. 3. Biological properties Restoration assessment of B1 (caries at restoration margin)
Time frame: Post-restoration baseline (2 weeks), 6, 12, 18, and 24 months
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.