Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40629344›Full record

Trial reportBMC oral health2025

Clinical and radiographic outcomes of endocrowns fabricated from two different CAD-CAM materials versus stainless steel crowns in restoring first permanent molars in children: a randomized clinical trial.

Ahmed Ismail Taha, Aya Ehab Saad

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

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 NCT06432049 (Clinical and Radiographic Outcome of Endocrown Restoring First Permanent Molar in Children), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06432049 nacompletednot on this map

Clinical and Radiographic Outcome of Endocrown Restoring First Permanent Molar in Children: Clinical Randomized Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorKafrelsheikh UniversityRan2022 to 2024Enrolled30ConditionsComparing Different Types of Restorations for Restoring Endodontically Treated Permanent First Molar in ChildrenArmsrestoration for endodontically treated molar
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ahmed Ismail TahaProsthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Kafrelsheikh University, Mubark Road, 33511 Kafr Abu Tabl, Kafrelsheikh Governorate, Kafrelsheikh, 6860404, Egypt. Dentnet20@hotmail.com.
Aya Ehab SaadPediatric Dentistry and Public Health Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Delta University for science and technology, Mansoura, Egypt.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRestoring first permanent molars after endodontic treatment in children is challenging. Improved mechanical properties and adhesion of ceramic materials have led to the emergence of endocrown as a conservative and esthetic restorative option for endodontically treated molars in adults and offer dentists a restorative treatment for endodontically treated first permanent molars in children. The purpose of this study was clinical and radiographic evaluation of both endocrowns fabricated from 2 different materials and SSCs restoring endodontically treated first permenant molars in children over one year.

methodsThirty children were selected (18 girls and 12 boys) with an age range of 10-13 years old, with an endodontically treated first molar. Children were randomly divided into 3 groups: PMC group (restored with preformed SSCs), EMX group (restored with litium disilicate endocrown), and COP group (restored with indirect reinforced composite endocrown) (n = 10). Evaluation was done in terms of parent satisfaction, radiograph (base line and 12 months), the restoration survival after 12 months, plaque index (PI), and gingival index (GI) at base line, 6 months, and 12 months.The data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis H-test, which was used to compare an ordinal variable, and Friedman's test was used to compare an ordinal variable (P ≤.050).

resultsParent satisfaction showed statistically significant differences between PMC (mean rank = 7.5) and both EMX and COP (mean rank = 19.5) (P <.001), but not between the EMX and COP groups (P = 1.00). At 6 and 12 months, the PMC group's PI values were statistically significantly higher than those of the EMX and COP groups (P =.001 and P <.001, respectively). The GI values of the EMX and COP groups did not change significantly through different intervals (P = 1.000 and P =.135, respectively), whereas the GI values of the PMC group did (P =.050). At various intervals, it was found that there was no significant difference in the GI values between the three groups.

conclusionsThe survival rates of endorowns and SSCs were comparable. Compared to SSCs, endocrowns demonstrated a higher parental satisfaction, less plaque buildup, and improved gingival response.

trial registrationThe study protocol was retrospectively registered on Clinical Trials under No. (NCT06432049-29/05/2024).

Indexed as

Computer-Aided DesignCrownsDental MaterialsDental Prosthesis DesignDental Restoration, PermanentMolarStainless SteelAdolescentChildComposite ResinsDental Plaque IndexDental PorcelainFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleComposite ResinsDental MaterialsDental PorcelainStainless SteelCrownPermanent molarsPlaque index and pediateric dentistryRoot canal therapy

Identifiers

PMID40629344
PMCPMC12239335

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 Socratic graph.