Clinical Research Directory

Clinical Success of Onlays Fabricated With Different Types of Resin

Additive manufacturing, also referred to as "3D printing" or "rapid prototyping," is defined as the process of joining materials layer by layer to create an object based on 3D model data. In this method, a digital data set is first created on a computer (computer-aided design, CAD) and then transferred to a 3D printer. The designed object is produced by printing it in successive layers. In contrast, in subtractive manufacturing, restorations are produced by milling homogeneous blocks based on computer-designed models. Compared to subtractive manufacturing technology, additive manufacturing allows for the production of more complex, detailed, and larger structures with much less material waste and without excessive use of force. It is thought that additive manufacturing has the potential to overcome the disadvantages of subtractive manufacturing. Over the past decade, global sales of industrial and personal 3D printers, materials, and services have increased by more than 33% annually. Due to its success in the production of surgical guides, temporary and permanent restorations, crowns and bridges, occlusal splints, frameworks, and orthodontic appliances, this technology has attracted significant interest in the field of dentistry. Although additive manufacturing has started to be used as an alternative to subtractive manufacturing in many applications, there is still a lack of information regarding the chemical composition, mechanical, and physical properties of printable resins. Moreover, clinical data on the use of these resins in permanent restorations are quite limited. Therefore, the aim of this study is to clinically evaluate and monitor for one year the performance of onlay restorations fabricated with three different resins of varying compositions in endodontically treated teeth.

Direct Versus Indirect Endocrowns on Endodontically Treated Molars

In this clinical trial the performance of monolithic restorations made of indirect lithium disilicate ceramic and direct resin composite materials on severe structurally compromised endodontically treated molar teeth is evaluated. Rationale: It is presumed that indirect restoration of extensively restored endodontically treated molar teeth contributes to durability. However, there is a lack of evidence concerning the performance of both indirect ceramic and direct composite monolithic restorations. Such restorations are commonly named 'endocrowns'. Objective: The objective of the study is to investigate which treatment modality, indirect ceramic or direct composite endocrowns, provide the best restoration of severe structurally compromised endodontically treated molar teeth in terms of clinical performance. Study design: Randomised 5-year clinical trial with endodontically treated molar teeth restored with either indirect glass ceramic (experimental) or direct resin composite endocrowns (control). Study population: A total of 102 severe structurally compromised endodontically treated molar teeth that need to be restored, with a maximum of two restorations per patiënt. Patients are healthy volunteers over 18 years. Intervention: Each patiënt with a restorative indication for endodontically treated first and second molar teeth will be randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: indirect glass ceramic endocrown or direct composite endocrown.