An interventional study of intracanal reinforcement using short composite post and no intracanal reinforcement in Composite Post and Intracanal Reinfocement, sponsored by Cairo University. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 3 Years to 5 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-12-18.
Sponsored by Cairo University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Severely damaged incisors may lead to difficulty in speech, decreased masticatory efficiency, abnormal tongue habits, subsequent malocclusions, and psychological and self-esteem problems. There are several methods mentioned in the literature for the restoration of severely decayed primary anterior teeth. The benefits of pulp therapy include: removing cavitations or defects to eliminate areas that are susceptible to caries; stopping the progression of tooth demineralization; restoring the integrity of tooth structure; preventing the spread of infection and preventing the shifting of teeth due to loss of tooth structure. The risks of pulp therapy include lessening the longevity of teeth by making them more susceptible to fracture as after removal of gross caries lesion and gaining access to the pulp the tooth become too weak, recurrent lesions, restoration failure, complications, and iatrogenic damage to adjacent teeth.
There are different techniques can be used for gaining intracanal retention in primary teeth. one of these techniques is resin composite posts.
Composite post restorations have been in used in primary teeth from 1986. They yield satisfactory results when there is normal masticatory function, a balanced diet, and hygiene control.
The evidence to support any method of intracanal reinforcement for restoring grossly broken down anterior teeth is presently lacking.
This study aims to Evaluate the intracanal reinforcement with short composite post in upper primary incisors versus no reinforcement.
Cairo University is the lead sponsor of 4,780 studies on the registry; 1,427 are open to participants now.
Of its 36 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 5 (14%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Children Criteria:
Incisors criteria:
Radiographic criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Uncooperative children.
Procedure: intracanal reinforcement using short composite post
Procedure: no intracanal reinforcement
after pupectomy is done flowable composite will be applied 3mm intacanal to make a short compsite post before zircon crown aplicaction
no intracanal reinforcement using resin modified glass ionmer before zircon crown application
Crown success
binary ( presence or abscence of the zircon crown)
Time frame: 1 year
Clinically :Gingival health.
* A: No obvious sign of inflammation. * B: Mild marginal gingivitis - tissue slightly reddened and edematous. * C: Moderate marginal gingivitis - tissue obviously reddened and edematous. * D: Sever gingivitis - tissue is very sollowen: spontaneous bleeding.
Time frame: 1 year
Radiographic assessment.
* A: Healthy no pathosis noted. * B: Pathosis apparent but not requiring immediate treatment. * C: Pathosis apparent requiring immediate treatment.
Time frame: 1 year
No study locations are listed for this record.
Plan to share: Undecided
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Dec 2024. 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.
Cairo University