Trial reportBMC oral health2025
Clinical performance of indirect hybrid ceramic onlay restorations cemented with injectable resin composite versus dual-cure resin cement: an 18-month randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05954156 (Clinical Performance of Injectable Resin Composite Versus Dual Cured Resin Cement For Cementation of Indirect Hybrid Ceramic Onlay Restorations), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Clinical Performance of Injectable Resin Composite Versus Dual Cured Resin Cement For Cementation of Indirect Hybrid Ceramic Onlay Restorations: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Functional Adhesives for a Restorative Future.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe cementation of indirect restorations is a critical step influencing their long-term clinical success. While dual-cure resin cements are widely used, injectable resin composites have emerged as promising alternatives, offering improved handling, high filler content, and esthetic stability. However, their clinical performance as luting agents for indirect restorations remains insufficiently explored. This trial assessed the clinical performance of indirect hybrid ceramic onlay restorations cemented with injectable resin composite versus dual-cure resin cement over 18 months. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 28 participants were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 14) based on the cementation protocol. The intervention group received onlays cemented with injectable resin composite (BEAUTIFIL Flow Plus X F03, Shofu Dental Corporation), while the control group received dual-cure resin cement (BeautiCem SA, Shofu Dental Corporation). Standardized procedures were followed for cavity preparation, immediate dentin sealing, cavity optimization, impression-taking, onlay fabrication (SHOFU Block HC, Shofu Dental Corporation), and cementation. Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months using the modified USPHS criteria. Data were statistically analyzed with significance set at P ≤ 0.05. Intergroup comparisons were assessed with Chi-squared test, while intragroup comparisons were assessed with Cochran's Q test. Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log-rank test were used to evaluate survival rates.
resultsInter- and intragroup comparisons revealed no significant differences between the two groups for most outcomes (P > 0.05). However, at 18 months, dual-cure resin cement exhibited significantly higher marginal discoloration than injectable resin composite (P = 0.038). Within the dual-cure resin cement group, a significant decline in alpha scores for marginal discoloration was observed from baseline to 18 months (P = 0.007). While no restorations failed (Charlie score), Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and the log-rank test demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.029).
conclusionsAfter 18 months, injectable resin composite demonstrated acceptable and comparable clinical performance to dual-cure resin cement, with the added benefit of reduced marginal discoloration. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Injectable resin composites offer a viable alternative to dual-cure resin cements for luting indirect restorations with enhanced esthetic outcomes.
trial registrationhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/ , (NCT05954156), 20-07-2023.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.