search
Back to results

Clinical Evaluation of ELS Versus ELS Extra Resin Composite

Primary Purpose

Caries, Dental

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Turkey
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
ELS Extra composite
ELS composite
Sponsored by
Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Caries, Dental focused on measuring composite restoration

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Primary caries removal
  • Class I & II restoration replacement
  • No obvious untreated caries, dental health problems (regularly checked by a dentist)
  • Good or moderate oral hygiene (plaque score of less than 30% in anterior region be-fore treatment)
  • No untreated periodontal disease (only DPSI 1, 2)
  • Subjects had to present no active carious lesions
  • Subjects had to be over the age of 18, be classified according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) as ASA I or ASA II, present with good oral hygiene, and be free of periodontal disease (probing depth and attachment levels within normal limits, no furcation involvement, and no mobility)
  • Subjects had to agree to keep the scheduled recall appointments for data collection and maintenance and plan to stay in the area for at least 3 years.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Caries extends cemento-enamel junction in Class II.
  • Considerable horizontal and/or vertical mobility of teeth: tooth mobility index score 2 or 3
  • Considerable periodontal disease without treatment (DPSI 3-, 3+ and 4)
  • Endodontic treatment with extensive loss of tooth tissue
  • Patients who still want to bleach their teeth or bleached teeth less than 3 weeks ago
  • Excluding the teeth, with opposing natural dentition (either intact or restored with intracoronal or extracoronal fixed restorations), and with a minimum of 20 teeth
  • Subjects who presented with severe wear facets and/or reported parafunctional activities such as clenching or nocturnal bruxism
  • Subjects who were restored with a removable partial dental prosthesis (RPDP), unless the RPDP replaced the tooth that was planned to be restored in the study
  • Subjects who were pregnant pregnant during the duration of the study
  • Subjects who are known to be allergic to the ingredients of resin materials

Sites / Locations

  • Istanbul Medipol University, Dental School

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Experimental

Active Comparator

Arm Label

ELS Extra composite

ELS composite

Arm Description

Commercially available composite resin restorative that will be used for direct restoration as per manufacturer's instructions

Commercially available composite resin restorative that will be used for direct restoration as per manufacturer's instructions

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Modified FDI criteria
Restoration failure is based on clinical performance criteria according to the modified FDI criteria

Secondary Outcome Measures

Full Information

First Posted
October 5, 2017
Last Updated
February 28, 2023
Sponsor
Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
Collaborators
Saremco
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03306576
Brief Title
Clinical Evaluation of ELS Versus ELS Extra Resin Composite
Official Title
Clinical Evaluation of Restorations Made of ELS Versus ELS Extra Resin Composite: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial up to 3 Years
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
February 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
December 10, 2017 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
October 15, 2018 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
December 30, 2020 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
Collaborators
Saremco

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Product Manufactured in and Exported from the U.S.
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Adhesive restorative materials are routinely used in operative dentistry to improve tooth tissues with minimal preparation, achieve more esthetic and long term restorations. Despite these efficacy to dentistry these materials still present some drawbacks like polymerization shrinkage. Postoperative sensitivity, marginal discoloration and possibly secondary caries are often associated with loss of marginal integrity in composite restorations occurred as a result of polymerization shrinkage. To achieve optimal long term performance, the requirements will be first to manage polymerization stress buildup following restoration.Low-shrinking composites with new formulas have been successful in brilliantly further developing the leader product els extra low shrinkage. The objective of this controlled clinical trial is to evaluate the clinical performance of restorative material ELS versus ELS Extra resin composite for Class I and Class II cavities that needs to be restored in permanent teeth.
Detailed Description
The detrimental impact of resin composite polymerization shrinkage on restoration interface quality and stability has been recognized since the early use of this material is still one of the major drawbacks in adhesive dentistry, as it frequently leads to loss of marginal integrity or enamel fracture. According to clinical studies, drawbacks such as postoperative sensitivity, marginal discoloration and possibly secondary caries are often associated with loss of marginal integrity in composite restorations occurred as a result of polymerization shrinkage. Various technological solutions were investigated, including improved filler technology; improved, novel matrix structure with reduced shrinkage; use of stress-decreasing compounds within the resin matrix; changes in light-initiation technology to increase curing depth; and use of sonic vibrations and energy to favor flow and adaptation of highly filled resin composite. To achieve optimal long term performance, the requirements will be first to manage polymerization stress buildup following restoration. Low-shrinking composites should help to avoid clinical problems that are commonly associated with composite restorations, such as post-operative sensitivity, enamel cracks, rapid discoloration and deterioration of restoration margins, early development of caries recurrence, with a new formula and improved sculptability SAREMCO has been successful in brilliantly further developing the leader product els extra low shrinkage. When using new simplified restorative systems featuring distinctive physicochemical characteristics, the potential impact of different parameters such as fatigue behavior and/or elastic modulus on restoration quality and behavior is unknown and justifies additional investigations. Instead of in vitro evaluations, consideration of a rather well-established clinical trials suggesting medium to long term observation periods to discriminately appraise the clinical performance of various operative protocols. The project includes 30 patients. Most of the patients have been recruited from the Istanbul Medipol University Dental Clinics in Istanbul. After giving their consent to take part in the study Class I & II restorations of both upper and lower molars and premolars are performed.The treatment procedure is: The patients are offered local anesthetic before treatment start. The cavity is excavated and filled according to the guidelines for composite restorations. The control procedure is: The restoration is evaluated according to marginal adaptation, cavo surface marginal discoloration, approximal contact, fractures, caries associated with restorations and postoperative hypersensitivity. The controls will take place after two weeks, one year, two years and three years.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Caries, Dental
Keywords
composite restoration

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
Each participant will receive 2 matched restorations, one of each material.
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
30 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
ELS Extra composite
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Commercially available composite resin restorative that will be used for direct restoration as per manufacturer's instructions
Arm Title
ELS composite
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Commercially available composite resin restorative that will be used for direct restoration as per manufacturer's instructions
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
ELS Extra composite
Intervention Description
One of the teeth will be restored using ELS composite. Procedures will be done under local anesthesia if necessary. The preparation and restoration of the tooth will be done according to to the guidelines for ordinary restorative techniques.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
ELS composite
Intervention Description
the other teeth will be restored with a ELS resin composite with ordinary restorative techniques.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Modified FDI criteria
Description
Restoration failure is based on clinical performance criteria according to the modified FDI criteria
Time Frame
3 years

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Primary caries removal Class I & II restoration replacement No obvious untreated caries, dental health problems (regularly checked by a dentist) Good or moderate oral hygiene (plaque score of less than 30% in anterior region be-fore treatment) No untreated periodontal disease (only DPSI 1, 2) Subjects had to present no active carious lesions Subjects had to be over the age of 18, be classified according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) as ASA I or ASA II, present with good oral hygiene, and be free of periodontal disease (probing depth and attachment levels within normal limits, no furcation involvement, and no mobility) Subjects had to agree to keep the scheduled recall appointments for data collection and maintenance and plan to stay in the area for at least 3 years. Exclusion Criteria: Caries extends cemento-enamel junction in Class II. Considerable horizontal and/or vertical mobility of teeth: tooth mobility index score 2 or 3 Considerable periodontal disease without treatment (DPSI 3-, 3+ and 4) Endodontic treatment with extensive loss of tooth tissue Patients who still want to bleach their teeth or bleached teeth less than 3 weeks ago Excluding the teeth, with opposing natural dentition (either intact or restored with intracoronal or extracoronal fixed restorations), and with a minimum of 20 teeth Subjects who presented with severe wear facets and/or reported parafunctional activities such as clenching or nocturnal bruxism Subjects who were restored with a removable partial dental prosthesis (RPDP), unless the RPDP replaced the tooth that was planned to be restored in the study Subjects who were pregnant pregnant during the duration of the study Subjects who are known to be allergic to the ingredients of resin materials
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Mutlu Ozcan, Prof Dr,PhD
Organizational Affiliation
University of Zurich, Center for Dental Materials Unit, Center for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Materials Science
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Istanbul Medipol University, Dental School
City
Istanbul
ZIP/Postal Code
34083
Country
Turkey

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No

Learn more about this trial

Clinical Evaluation of ELS Versus ELS Extra Resin Composite

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs