ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
Clinical Assessment of Giomer Based Technology Versus Smart Bioactive Restoration in Carious Class V Cavities
This study will compare between S-PRG-containing injectable flowable resin composite (Beautifil Flow Plus X) and smart bioactive flowable resin composite (Activa bioactive restorative) through evaluation of the modified USPHS clinical performance in patients with carious class V moderately deep cavities.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Clinical Performance of Short Fiber Reinforced Flowable Versus Conventional Injectable Flowable Resin Composite Restorations in Class I Carious Cavities#895618
- Clinical Evaluation of Bioactive Injectable Resin Composite in Posterior Restorations#1087735
- Clinical Performance of Two Different Restorative Materials in Restoring Class II Cavities of Primary Molars#869901
- Self-Cure vs. Highly Filled Flowable Composite in Carious Cervical Lesions: 18-Month RCT#861587
- Evaluation of Using Self-adhering Flowable Resin Composite in Repairing Old Defective Resin Composite Restorations Over 18 Months Follow up. (A Randomized Clinical Trial)#826284
Record · ID 915982
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive