Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Injectable Composite Versus Packable Composite in Restoring of Primary Molars
Clinical and Radiographic Assessment of Injectable Composite Versus Packable Composite in the Restoration of Cavitated Primary Molars a Randomized Clinical Trial
This randomized clinical trial aims to compare the clinical and radiographic performance of injectable composite versus packable composite in restoring cavitated primary molars in children aged 4 to 8 years.
Study Purpose
To determine whether injectable composite performs as well as packable composite in Class II restorations in primary molars clinically and radiographically.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
This randomized clinical trial aims to compare the clinical and radiographic performance of injectable composite versus packable composite in restoring cavitated primary molars in children aged 4-8 years.
Study Purpose
To determine whether injectable composite performs as well packable composite in Class II restorations in primary molars.
Study Design
Type: Randomized clinical trial
Sample: 64 primary molars (32 per group)
Allocation: 1:1 using concealed envelopes
Group I (Experimental group): Injectable composite (Beautifil Flow Plus X F00, Shofu, Japan) Group II (Control group): Packable composite (Beautifil II LS, Shofu, Japan)
Follow-up: Clinical at 3, 6, 12 months
Radiographic at 0, 6, 12 months
Location: Pediatric Dentistry Clinic, Cairo University
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Clinical Performance (FDI Criteria):
Functional: marginal adaptation, fracture, proximal contact, occlusion, wear
Biological: caries at margins, hard tissue defects, sensitivity, pulp status
Esthetic: texture, staining, color match
Secondary Outcome Radiographic Performance:
Presence/absence of voids
Marginal integrity on bitewing radiographs
Rationale
Injectable composites may offer:
Better cavity adaptation
Easier handling
Shorter chair time (important in pediatric dentistry)
Packable composites offer:
Higher strength and wear resistance
The study investigates whether injectables can match or outperform packables clinically.
Hypothesis
Null hypothesis: There is no difference between injectable and packable composites in clinical and radiographic success.
Intervention The principal investigator ES will carry out all treatment procedures, and the patients will be randomly assigned to any of them.
For both groups:
- Informed consent from participating children parents.
- Baseline records photographs, percussion test, periapical radiograph and personal data collection (Appendix 1: Diagnostic chart).
Diagnostic chart with personal, medical and dental history will be filled (Appendix 1:
Diagnostic chart).
- Allocation (concealed by withdrawing a sealed opaque envelope containing Four-folded numbered papers containing the type of restorative material that will be used then writing the patient name and I.D. on it and will be opened after performing the cavity).
- Clinical examination will be performed to assess the clinical inclusion criteria.
- Preoperative and Postoperative photographs will be taken.
- The radiographic examination will be performed by taking a periapical x-ray using (bitewing technique) to assess the inclusion criteria. The preoperative radiograph will serve as a reference for the follow-up radiographs.
- Administration of local anesthesia at the side of the affected tooth.
- Application of rubber dam for isolation, then caries removal procedure will be performed using a sterile round-end bur in a high-speed handpiece
- After cavity preparation, conditioning of the tooth will be done using 35% phosphoric acid for 30 seconds for enamel and 15 seconds for dentin. Then, after rinsing the acid etch with water for 10 seconds, bond will be applied to the tooth using a bond brush and then cured for 5 seconds.
- The restorative material will be placed in the cavity and will be cured for 20 seconds per increment for the intervention group and for 20 seconds for the control group (17).
- The last step is to finish and polish the restoration material with abrasive rubber tips using the KENDA C.G.I polishing system (Coltene, Switzerland) (
- Clinical assessment will be done after each visit using FDI criteria to assess the clinical performance of each restoration in the three domains (biological, functional and aesthetics) and radiographic assessment will be done for 0, 6, and 12 months using periapical bitewing x-ray.
Sample size calculation:
Data will be analyzed using Medcalc software, version 22 for Windows (MedCalc Software Ltd, Ostend, Belgium).
Categorical data will be described as frequency and percentage. Intergroup Comparisons between categorical variables will be performed using the chi-square test, while intragroup comparisons within each intervention will be performed using Cochran's Q test followed by pairwise multiple comparisons.
A p-value less than or equal to 0.05 will be considered statistically significant, and all tests will be two-tailed. Statistical power of the study will be set at 80% with a 95% confidence level.
The sample size was calculated based on a previous study by Inthihas et al in 2019, in which the success rate of proximal giomer restorations in primary molars was 94.1% after 12 months (17).
By implementing a two tailed Z test for the difference between two independent proportions with an alpha level of 5% and a power of 80%.
The minimum sample size needed was 28 per group in order to detect a difference of 30%.
Sample size was increased by 15% to compensate for possible dropouts to reach 32 teeth per group. Sample size was performed using G*Power version 3.1.9.2 for windows.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Eslam Kalboush, Mcs
- Phone Number: 01028992916
- Email: eslam.samy@dentistry.cu.edu.eg
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Eslam Kalboush, Mcs
- Phone Number: 01141494591
- Email: essamy22@gmail.com
Study Locations
-
-
Cairo Governorate
-
Cairo, Cairo Governorate, Egypt, 11553
- Faculty of Dentistry,Cairo University
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Child
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
Patients:
- Children aged 4-8 years.
- Medically free.
Teeth:
- Restorable Class II cavities.
- Asymptomatic tooth.
Pre-operative radiographic examination:
- Absence of periapical or inter-radicular radiolucency.
- Absence of widening of periodontal ligaments space.
- Absence of internal or external root resorption.
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients:
- Uncooperative children.
- Unable to attend follow-up visits.
- Parents refuse to sign the informed consent.
- Children participating in any other clinical trial involving fluoride therapy or other interventions that could directly influence caries development during the study period.
Teeth:
- Teeth which were previously restored.
- Mobility.
Pre-operative radiographic examination:
- Caries extending deep sub-gingivally.
- The tooth is about to exfoliate.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Double
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: injectable composite
it is a type of zero flow injectable composite used to restore teeth and molars
|
type of zero flow injectable composite
|
|
Other: Packable composite
composite used to restore molars
|
packable composite used to restore teeth and molars
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Clinical Assessment of Injectable Composite Versus Packable Composite in The Restoration of Cavitated Primary Molars
Time Frame: Time: T0 = baseline assessment and procedure will be done. T1 =3 months follow up. T2 = 6 months follow up. T3 = One-year follow-up.
|
Clinical evaluation will be done according to Fédération Dentaire Internationale FDI criteria Scores: Clinically excellent = 1 Clinically good = 2 Clinically sufficient = 3 Clinically unsatisfactory = 4 Clinically poor = 5 |
Time: T0 = baseline assessment and procedure will be done. T1 =3 months follow up. T2 = 6 months follow up. T3 = One-year follow-up.
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Radiographic Assessment of Injectable Composite Versus Packable Composite in The Restoration of Cavitated Primary Molars.
Time Frame: t = 0 months t2 = 6 months t3 = 12 months
|
radiographic assessment will be done by using bitewing x-ray
|
t = 0 months t2 = 6 months t3 = 12 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Eslam Kalboush, Mcs, Cairo university
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Estimated)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 191131345021234567891911313450
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Dental Caries in Children
-
NCT07152561Not yet recruitingDental Caries in Children
-
NCT07609797RecruitingDental Caries in Children | Dental Caries
-
NCT07625982CompletedPreschool Children | Dental Caries in Primary Teeth
-
NCT07091331Not yet recruitingDental Caries in Children | Caries, Dental | Caries; Dentin
-
NCT03770286CompletedDental Caries in Children | Dental Caries | Dental Caries Class II
-
NCT06254053Not yet recruitingDental Caries in Children | Dental Materials
-
NCT07009015RecruitingDental Caries in Children
-
NCT04491981Not yet recruitingDental Caries in Children | Dental Caries
-
NCT04947527CompletedDental Caries in Children
Clinical Trials on injectable composite
-
NCT06991582Not yet recruitingCarious Primary | Carious Anteriors
-
NCT06950762Not yet recruitingRestoration of Carious Class v Anterior Teeth
-
NCT06205420Completed
-
NCT05499494Not yet recruitingDental Restoration Failure
-
NCT07267143Completed
-
NCT06875544Not yet recruitingDME | Dental | Deep Margin Elevation
-
NCT05389163Completed
-
NCT05263089CompletedProximal Cavities of Posterior Teeth
-
NCT05954156CompletedCementation Teeth | Badly Broken Down Vital Teeth