[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"endodontically-treated-molar\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:endodontically-treated-molar":27},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,4,0,[8,44,72,100],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":15,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":17,"maxAge":18,"enrollmentInfo":19,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":23,"briefSummary":25,"conditions":26,"keywords":28,"overallStatus":32,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":33,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":34,"startDateStruct":37,"completionDateStruct":39,"leadSponsor":41,"locationsCount":4},"100639112","this-study-is-conducted-to-evaluate-the-clinical-performance-of-indirect-overlay-restorations-with-different-cavity-preparation-designs-in-endodontically-treated-molars-100639112",false,"NCT07614451","This Study is Conducted to Evaluate the Clinical Performance of Indirect Overlay Restorations With Different Cavity Preparation Designs in Endodontically Treated Molars.","A Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Indirect Overlay Restorations With Different Cavity Preparation Designs in Endodontically Treated Molars: Two Year Randomized Clinical Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\nPatient Related Criteria:\n\n* Adult patients (age: 20-60 years) of both genders.\n* Healthy patients (not suffering of any systematic or chronic diseases).\n* Able to tolerate the necessary restorative procedures.\n* Willing to sign the informed ethical consent.\n* Accepts the follow-up period.\n\nTooth Related Criteria:\n\n* Proper endodontically treated teeth.\n* First and second permanent molars.\n* Absence of any peri-apical lesions.\n* Absence of any periodontal disease involvement.\n* Large access cavities with one or two missing walls.\n* Patients with proper oral hygiene.\n* Presence of opposing tooth.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patient related:\n* Patients younger than 20 or older than 60 years old.\n* Pregnant females.\n* Patients with any systemic or chronic diseases.\n* Patients not accepting the follow-up period.\n* Patients not willing to sign the informed ethical consent.\n* Patients with known allergies to latex and\u002For resinous material.\n\nTooth related\n\n* Endodontically treated anterior, premolar and third molar teeth.\n* Hopelessly carious\u002Fdestructed teeth necessitating extraction.\n* Mobile teeth, indicating periodontal disease or trauma.\n* External or internal resorption.\n* Poor endodontic treatment.\n* Periapical lesion present.\n* Cervical carious lesions involved.","ALL","20 Years","60 Years",{"count":20,"type":21},50,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[24],"NA","This study is conducted to evaluate the clinical performance of indirect overlay restorations with different cavity preparation designs in endodontically treated molars over two years.",[27],"Endodontically Treated Molar",[29,30,31],"overlay","endodontically treated molars","biomimetic preparation","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-05-22",{"date":35,"type":36},"2026-05-29","ACTUAL",{"date":38,"type":21},"2026-06-15",{"date":40,"type":21},"2028-08-15",{"name":42,"class":43},"Cairo University","OTHER",{"id":45,"slug":46,"hasResults":11,"nctId":47,"briefTitle":48,"officialTitle":49,"acronym":50,"eligibilityCriteria":51,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":52,"maxAge":18,"enrollmentInfo":53,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":55,"briefSummary":56,"conditions":57,"keywords":59,"overallStatus":32,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":63,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":64,"startDateStruct":66,"completionDateStruct":68,"leadSponsor":70,"locationsCount":71},"100622081","3d-printed-ceramic-filled-photopolymer-resin-vs-cadcam-resin-composite-overlays-for-restoration-of-extensively-damaged-endodontically-treated-posterior-teeth-an-18-month-follow-up-100622081","NCT07378982","3D Printed Ceramic-Filled Photopolymer Resin Vs. CAD\u002FCAM Resin Composite Overlays for Restoration of Extensively Damaged Endodontically Treated Posterior Teeth. An 18-month Follow-up","Three Dimensionally Printed Ceramic-Filled Photopolymer Resin Versus CAD\u002FCAM Resin Composite Overlays for Restoration of Extensively Damaged Endodontically Treated Posterior Teeth. An 18-month Follow-up Randomized Controlled Trial","3D CAD\u002FCAM RCT","Inclusion Criteria:\n\nFor Participants:\n\n* Age: 18-60 years.\n* Males or females.\n* Participants with endodontically treated molar teeth. Lower molars indicated for onlay (one or two missing cusps)\n* Patients with at least 20 teeth under occlusion.\n* Good oral hygiene.\n* Co-operative patients approving to participate in the trial.\n* Have sufficient cognitive ability to understand consent procedures.\n\nFor Teeth:\n\nBadly destructed endodontically treated molars teeth indicated for cuspal total cuspal coverage (Overlay restoration)\n\n* No signs or symptoms after endodontic treatment.\n* No signs of clinical mobility.\n* Teeth with healthy periodontium.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\nFor Participants:\n\n* Participants with parafunctional habits or bruxism.\n* Participants with systemic diseases or disabilities that may affect participation.\n* Heavy smoking.\n* Pregnancy.\n* Lack of compliance.\n* Severe or active periodontal disease.\n* Cognitive impairment for teeth:\n* Periapical pathosis indicating failure in endodontic treatment.\n* Vital teeth.\n* Signs of pathological wear.\n* Severe periodontal affection or tooth indicated for extraction.\n* Signs of Vertical root fracture.","18 Years",{"count":54,"type":21},32,[24],"II. Introduction:\n\n6\\. Background and rationale: Restoring badly mutilated teeth was and has always been a challenge in restorative dentistry. In order to solve this issue, different approaches have been proposed, including cuspal protection or cuspal coverage. This proved to increase the fracture resistance of remaining tooth structure and overall survivability of endodontically treated teeth. Different materials and techniques have been proposed to attain cuspal coverage, such as using indirect milled or pressed ceramics, indirect milled composite, and direct composite restorations(Abu-Awwad, 2019).\n\nThe integration of 3D printing in dentistry has revolutionized the fabrication of permanent indirect restorations, including inlays, onlays, and overlays. Evaluation of whether the mechanical properties, clinical feasibility, and accuracy of 3D-printed resin restorations are compared to traditional milled and pressed alternatives. Key findings highlight superior marginal fit, cost-efficiency, and adaptability of 3D-printed resins, while addressing limitations such as stain susceptibility and long-term durability\n\nResearch question:\n\nDoes a 3D printed ceramic-filled photopolymer resin show any difference in clinical performance when compared to a CAD\u002FCAM milled composite in restoring badly decayed endodontically treated posterior teeth?\n\nStatement of the problem:\n\nThe problems of indirect milled composites include the initial cost of the milling machine, running cost of machine repairs, bur changes, and the cost of discs and blocks, not to mention that the concept of milling as a manufacturing process has an unavoidable loss of material. (Josic et al., 2023)\n\nRationale for conducting the research:\n\nIndirect restorations, such as inlays (without cusp coverage), onlays (partial cusp coverage), and overlays (full cusp coverage), aim to preserve tooth structure while restoring function and esthetics. Historically, these restorations were fabricated using ceramics or composite resins via subtractive milling or heat-pressing techniques. However, 3D printing has emerged as a transformative technology, enabling additive manufacturing of resin-based restorations with enhanced precision and reduced material waste. (Tribst et al., 2024)\n\nReview of literature:\n\nExtensively destructed endodontically treated molars may represent a high-risk restorative scenario due to loss of internal dentin support and undermined cusps leading to increased flexure, stress concentration and analysis, making failure more likely to occur due to cuspal fracture, bulk fracture, tooth splitting or adhesive debonding rather than simple marginal defects. Contemporary restorative concepts therefore emphasize preserving remaining tooth structure while providing cuspal coverage through adhesively bonded partial-coverage restorations like onlays, overlays and endocrowns, aiming to redistribute occlusal loads and reduce catastrophic tooth fracture. Clinical reviews of root-filled teeth consistently highlight that prognosis depends less on \"endodontic status\" itself and more on the quantity and quality of remaining coronal tissue, presence of ferrule, and the capacity of the definitive restoration to protect the tooth under function.\n\nAmong current treatment options, direct resin composite restorations remain attractive for being conservative, repairable, and cost-efficient. However, the effectiveness of this treatment modality decreases as cavity size leading to increased polymerization shrinkage stresses, reduced cuspal stiffness as a result of increased cavity depth, difficulty in achieving durable proximal anatomy in very large defects, and technique sensitivity under moisture compromised isolation, which can translate into higher risk of fracture or marginal breakdown over time. Indirect restorations including full crowns, partial-coverage ceramic restorations, and resin-based CAD\u002FCAM restorations can provide better anatomic control and cuspal coverage, but has some drawbacks like added steps, cost, and may require more tooth reduction depending on design and material used.\n\nSystematic review and meta-analysis evidence focusing specifically on endodontically treated posterior teeth suggests that outcomes between direct composite and indirect approaches can be broadly comparable in some settings, but there is a tendency for indirect restorations to be favored as defect severity increases and remaining walls decrease, while direct restorations may be more appropriate for smaller defects; importantly, the available evidence is heterogeneous and often limited by variation in preparation design, materials, and follow-up.",[27,58],"Dental Restoration, Permanent",[60,61,62],"3D printing","CAD\u002FCAM milling","Overlay restoration","2026-02-02",{"date":65,"type":36},"2026-02-04",{"date":67,"type":21},"2026-02-01",{"date":69,"type":21},"2027-10-01",{"name":42,"class":43},1,{"id":73,"slug":74,"hasResults":11,"nctId":75,"briefTitle":76,"officialTitle":77,"acronym":78,"eligibilityCriteria":79,"healthyVolunteers":80,"sex":16,"minAge":52,"maxAge":81,"enrollmentInfo":82,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":84,"briefSummary":85,"conditions":86,"keywords":89,"overallStatus":91,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":92,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":93,"startDateStruct":95,"completionDateStruct":97,"leadSponsor":99,"locationsCount":71},"100554573","assessment-of-marginal-and-internal-fit-of-high-performance-polymer-peek-endocrown-using-two-preparation-designs-100554573","NCT06500845","Assessment of Marginal and Internal Fit of High Performance Polymer PEEK Endocrown Using Two Preparation Designs","Assessment of Marginal and Internal Fit of High Performance Polymer Endocrown Using Two Preparation Designs (Randomized Clinical Trial)","PEEK","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patient age range from 18 years -50 years old. They should be able to read and write so they can sign the informed consent.\n2. Patient should have a good physical and psychologically state to be able to withstand the steps of the restoration procedure.\n3. Have a molar with root canal filling with no active periodontal or apical involvement.\n4. Patients having root canal treatment teeth indicated for endocrown treatment with 3 or 4 axial walls remaining.\n5. Patient with axial wall length not less than 3 mm and not more than 5 mm.\n6. Patient should have good oral hygiene and motivation.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patient with periodontal or apical involvement or improper root canal treatment.\n2. Severe loss of the tooth structure in which the amount of the remaining tooth structure is less than 2mm.\n3. Patient with poor oral hygiene or with occlusal instability\n4. Patient with improper physical or psychological state.\n5. Patient not pregnant or lactating.",true,"50 Years",{"count":83,"type":21},24,[24],"First, Participants in this study will be recruited according to inclusion criteria. Proper examination for the participants (clinically and radiographically). Preparation for endodontically treated molar for receiving high performance polymer endocrown. Checking and verification for the restoration (trying) and assessment of marginal and internal fit by replica technique. Then final cementation of endocrown.",[27,87,88],"Marginal Fit","Internal Fit",[90],"Endocrown","RECRUITING","2025-09-15",{"date":94,"type":36},"2025-09-19",{"date":96,"type":21},"2025-09-17",{"date":98,"type":21},"2026-06-01",{"name":42,"class":43},{"id":101,"slug":102,"hasResults":11,"nctId":103,"briefTitle":104,"officialTitle":105,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":106,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":16,"minAge":107,"maxAge":81,"enrollmentInfo":108,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":22,"phases":109,"briefSummary":110,"conditions":111,"keywords":112,"overallStatus":32,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":120,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":121,"startDateStruct":123,"completionDateStruct":125,"leadSponsor":127,"locationsCount":4},"100576605","comparison-of-the-clinical-performance-of-high-strength-hybrid-ceramic-indirect-restorations-cemented-on-endodontically-treated-teeth-using-bioactive-versus-conventional-self-adhesive-resin-cements-100576605","NCT06787469","Comparison of the Clinical Performance of High Strength Hybrid Ceramic Indirect Restorations Cemented on Endodontically Treated Teeth Using Bioactive Versus Conventional Self Adhesive Resin Cements.","Clinical Performance of CAD\u002FCAM Hard Hybrid Ceramic Overlays on Endodontically Treated Molars Using Bioactive Versus Conventional Self-Adhesive Resin Cement: Two-Year Randomized Clinical Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patient Related Criteria:\n* Adult patients (age: 21-50 years) of both genders.\n* Able to tolerate necessary restorative procedures.\n* Willing to sign the informed consent.\n* Accepts the follow-up period.\n\nTooth Related Criteria:\n\n* Endodontically treated first and second permanent molars.\n* Access cavities with one missing proximal wall i.e. Occluso-mesial\u002Fdistal cavities\n* Patients with proper oral hygiene\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Endodontically treated anterior, premolar and third molar teeth\n* Badly broken-down teeth\n* Hopelessly carious\u002Fdestructed teeth necessitating extraction\n* Mobile teeth, indicating periodontal disease or trauma.\n* External or internal resorption.\n* Cervical carious lesions\n* Medically compromised patients\n* Patients with known allergies to Latex and\u002For resinous material","21 Years",{"count":20,"type":21},[24],"Cementation of indirect restoration is a determinant of the success or failure of the fabricated restoration and consequentially the entire tooth. While there are numerous commercially available resin cements in the dental market, not all have been sufficiently assessed with significant follow up periods to clinically determine their success or failure. As such, this research will be conducted to elucidate if there is a viability to the cementation of indirect hybrid ceramic blocks over endodontically treated teeth using bioactive self-adhesive resin cement and determining whether it provides a clinical advantage and improved restoration serviceability in the oral cavity.",[27],[113,114,115,116,117,118,119],"Resin Cement","SHOFU","Bioactive Resin Cement","SPRG","S-PRG","Endodontically treated teeth","BeautiLink SA","2025-06-08",{"date":122,"type":36},"2025-06-10",{"date":124,"type":21},"2025-06-23",{"date":126,"type":21},"2027-01-01",{"name":42,"class":43}]