ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
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.
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 Restorative Materials in Primary Teeth#887652
- Clinical Performance of Two Different Restorative Materials in Restoring Class II Cavities of Primary Molars#869901
- Clinical Performance of Two Different Resin-Matrix Ceramic Restorations#837669
- Influence of Operator Factors on Succes and Survival of Indirect Restorations#838610
- Clinical Performance of Short Fiber Reinforced Flowable Versus Conventional Injectable Flowable Resin Composite Restorations in Class I Carious Cavities#895618
Record · ID 980978
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