About this trial
The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the long-term clinical performance of three different luting cements used to bond prefabricated zirconia crowns (PZCs) on primary front teeth in young children. The trial will determine whether any single cement offers superior retention, gum health, or marginal sealing compared to the others over a 3-year period.
Main Questions:
The study aims to answer the following:
Are conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC), bioactive resin-modified glass ionomer cement (BioCem™), and self-adhesive resin cement (SARC) equivalent in retaining prefabricated zirconia crowns on primary incisors over 36 months? Do these cements differ in their effect on gingival health, plaque accumulation, or marginal discoloration around the cemented crown?
Comparison:
Researchers will compare three parallel groups of children whose primary incisors are restored with identical prefabricated zirconia crowns but cemented with one of the three different luting cements.
Participants will: Receive a clinical and radiographic dental examination at screening. Undergo placement of one or more prefabricated zirconia crowns on primary anterior teeth using their randomly assigned cement. Return to the clinic for blinded follow-up evaluations at 12, 24, and 36 months for assessment of crown retention, gingival health, plaque, and marginal staining.
Eligibility criteria
This trial accepts healthy volunteersQualifiers
Healthy children aged 2 to 7 years
One or more primary maxillary or mandibular incisors requiring full-coverage restoration due to caries or trauma
Adequate remaining tooth structure following preparation, defined as greater than 50% of the clinical crown
Parent or legal guardian able and willing to provide written informed consent and to commit to the 36-month follow-up schedule
Disqualifiers
Active periodontal disease at the index tooth, defined as a Löe Gingival Index score of 2 or higher
Parafunctional habits such as bruxism, severe thumb-sucking, or tongue-thrust documented at screening
Known allergy or hypersensitivity to zirconia, resin, glass ionomer, or any component of the assigned cement
Inconsistent oral hygiene, defined as less than twice-daily toothbrushing per parental report
Trial design
Parallel
Treatments tested in this trial
Cementation with Fuji IX GP Extra Glass Ionomer Cement
Procedure/SurgeryCementation with Fuji IX GP Extra Glass Ionomer Cement Hand-mixed conventional glass ionomer luting cement applied per manufacturer protocol; crown seated under finger pressure for 3 minutes; excess removed after initial set.
Cementation with BioCem™ Universal BioActive Cement
Procedure/SurgeryCementation with BioCem™ Universal BioActive Cement Auto-mixed bioactive resin-modified luting cement applied per manufacturer protocol; brief tack-cure to facilitate excess removal followed by full light-curing for 20 seconds per surface.
Cementation with RelyX™ Universal Resin Cement
Procedure/SurgeryCementation with RelyX™ Universal Resin Cement Self-adhesive dual-cure resin luting cement applied per manufacturer protocol; tack-cured for 2-3 seconds for excess removal, followed by full light-curing for 20 seconds per surface.
Treatment groups
Trial outcomes
Primary outcomes
Crown Retention (Survival)
The primary outcome is the cumulative retention of prefabricated zirconia crowns over a 36-month follow-up period. Retention is assessed by a single blinded examiner at each scheduled visit using two complementary methods: (a) visual/tactile inspection with a sharp dental explorer applied circumferentially along the crown margin to detect dislodgement, mobility, or marginal gap; and (b) LED transillumination using the DEXIS CariVu® system to detect cracks, debonding, or marginal microleakage. A crown is classified as "failed" (debonded) if any complete loss of cement seal, dislodgement, or detectable marginal gap is observed. Retention is reported as the proportion of crowns surviving at each time point and as the time-to-failure for survival analysis. Higher retention proportions and longer survival times indicate better clinical performance.
Secondary outcomes
Plaque Accumulation Measured by the Silness & Löe Plaque Index (1964)
Plaque accumulation at the gingival margin of each cemented crown is assessed using the Silness \& Löe Plaque Index. The same four sites per tooth (mesial, distal, buccal, lingual) are scored by a blinded examiner on a 4-point ordinal scale: 0 = no plaque; 1 = a film of plaque adhering to the free gingival margin, recognizable only by running a probe across the surface; 2 = moderate accumulation of soft deposits visible to the naked eye; 3 = abundance of soft matter. A mean PI score is calculated per tooth and per participant; the participant-level mean ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 3, with higher scores indicating greater plaque accumulation.
Gingival Health Measured by the Löe Gingival Index (1967)
Gingival inflammation around each cemented crown is assessed at baseline and at every follow-up visit using the Löe Gingival Index (1967). A single blinded examiner scores four gingival sites per tooth (mesial, distal, buccal, and lingual) on a 4-point ordinal scale: 0 = no clinical inflammation (normal gingiva); 1 = mild inflammation (slight color change, slight edema, no bleeding on probing); 2 = moderate inflammation (redness, edema, glazing, bleeding on probing); 3 = severe inflammation (marked redness and edema, ulceration, tendency to spontaneous bleeding). A mean GI score is calculated per tooth and per participant; the participant-level mean therefore ranges from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 3, with higher scores indicating worse gingival health.
Marginal Discoloration Measured by the Modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) Criteria
Discoloration at the crown-tooth interface is evaluated under standardized LED operatory lighting (1,000-1,400 lux) without magnification using the modified USPHS criteria, supplemented by high-resolution intraoral photography with cross-polarized filters. Each crown is assigned one of four ordinal ratings: Alpha (A) = no visible discoloration (best outcome); Bravo (B) = slight discoloration confined to the margin, not penetrating internally; Charlie (C) = obvious discoloration penetrating along the margin; Delta (D) = severe discoloration with secondary caries or restoration failure (worst outcome). The outcome is reported as the proportion of crowns in each category at each time point, with a higher proportion of Alpha ratings indicating better marginal integrity.
Other outcomes
Incidence and Severity of Adverse Events
The frequency, type, and severity of all adverse events occurring during the 36-month follow-up will be recorded for each arm. Events of interest include crown debonding, crown fracture, soft-tissue irritation or ulceration adjacent to the crown margin, allergic reaction to cement components, secondary caries, and pulpal complications. Severity will be classified using a three-tier framework adapted from the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) approach: Mild (Grade 1) - no intervention required; Moderate (Grade 2) - non-urgent intervention required (e.g., recementation at a scheduled visit); Severe (Grade 3) - urgent intervention, crown replacement, or treatment of secondary pathology required. The primary safety endpoint is the incidence rate (events per participant per year of follow-up) in each arm.
Sponsors and contacts
Click on the lead sponsor to view all of their trials.
Murad Alrashidi
Lead sponsor
Qassim University
Sponsor institution
This trial is not recruiting at the moment. You can still explore other options: