An interventional study of Immediate Dentin Sealing or Delayed Dentin Sealing in Adhesion, Tooth and Crown, sponsored by University Medical Center Groningen. Completed. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-02-27.
Sponsored by University Medical Center Groningen · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Immediate Dentin Sealing as an adjunct to adhesive cementation of all ceramic restorations is proposed and executed in several studies, but there is very limited evidence to support its effectiveness. It is presumed that IDS both reduces postoperative sensitivity and increases the bond strength to dentin as compared to DDS.
Micromechanical and chemical retention of ceramic fixed prosthesis to tooth structure introduced minimal invasive preparation to dentistry. As a result, biomechanically or aesthetically compromised teeth can be restored at a lower biological price, saving sound tooth tissues. A slow but steady (mind) shift from full metal and metal-ceramic restorations that require conventional cementation and substantial tooth loss (Edelhoff en Sorensen, 2002) to less destructive partial all ceramic restorations that require adhesive cementation is seen in the clinical field.
The clinical success of ceramic restorations relies heavily on the quality of their adhesion to dentin, which remains a clinical challenge to date. Improvements in this field over the years have brought about better cements and more effective methods to condition both substrates and teeth.
Immediate Dentin Sealing (IDS) is a technique that presumably improves adhesion of ceramic fixed prosthesis to tooth structure which results in a better marginal adaptation to dentin and less postoperative sensitivity compared to conventional adhesive cementation, also referred to as Delayed Dentin Sealing (DDS).(Pashley et al, 1992; Paul en Scharer, 1997; Magne et al, 2005; Magne et al, 2007; Breschi et al, 2008; Lee en Park, 2009). The main difference between the IDS and DDS technique lies in the fact that in IDS, a thin layer of bonding resin is applied immediately after tooth preparation and prior to impression taking, whereas in DDS this layer is applied immediately before cementation of the restoration. At first glance this may appear a minor difference, but it is presumed to be of major clinical importance. The effectiveness of IDS is studied as an adjunct to conventional adhesive cementation of ceramic indirect restorations. A split mouth clinical trial comparing ceramic restorations cemented with either IDS or DDS after one year of clinical service is executed. For each patient two all ceramic indirect restorations are made. One is cemented by means of DDS (control group) and the other one is cemented by means of IDS (experimental group). Clinical evaluation is performed shortly after cementation and after 1 and 3 year(s) of clinical function.
121 studies on the registry are indexed under Tissue Adhesions; 15 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 30 is below the median of 61 across 84 interventional studies indexed under Tissue Adhesions.
Browse Tissue Adhesions studies →University Medical Center Groningen is the lead sponsor of 627 studies on the registry; 175 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
An allergy, or another reaction of the immune system, to a substance. “Hypersensitivity to the study drug” means a known allergic reaction to it — not every side effect a medicine can have.
Hypersensitivity
An allergy, or another reaction of the immune system, to a substance. “Hypersensitivity to the study drug” means a known allergic reaction to it — not every side effect a medicine can have.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
The main difference between the IDS and DDS technique lies in the fact that in IDS, a thin layer of bonding resin is applied immediately after tooth preparation and prior to impression taking, whereas in DDS this layer is applied immediately before cementation of the restoration.
Survival
Survival of the restorations
Time frame: 3 year
Quality of the restorations
Criteria according to Hickel and USPHS
Time frame: 3 year
No study locations are listed for this record.
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Ran from Nov 2013 to primary completion in Feb 2018, 51 months.
Of 35 interventional studies with no phase under Tissue Adhesions, half reached primary completion within 17 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 34. This study's 51 months is above that.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2018. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University Medical Center Groningen →