03285cam a2200265 a 4500003000900000005001700009008004100026040002800067041000800095100002600103245027300129246029200402260004500694300004500739502011200784520186500896530002202761653002802783653003402811653003002845700003302875700003602908700004202944856003302986EG-GiCUC20250223032750.0210616s2020    ua do  f m    000 0 eng d  aEG-GiCUCbengcEG-GiCUC0 aeng0 aHamsa Ashraf Elgebaly10aOne-year clinical assessment of indirect restorations fabricated from nano hybrid composite blocks versus ceramic blocks in badly broken teeth : bA randomized clinical trial / cHamsa Ashraf Elgebaly ; Supervised Ahmed Elzohairy , Adel Eltannir, Shereen Hafez Ibrahim15aدراسة سريرية عشوائية : bالتقييم الإكلينيكى لمدة عام للترميمات الغير مباشرة المصممة بالكمبيوتر لمادة الكومبوزيت مقارنة بمادة السيراميك فى الاسنان المحطمة  aCairo : bHamsa Ashraf Elgebaly , c2020  a148 P. : bcharts , photographs ; c25cm  aThesis (M.Sc.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine - Department of Operative Dentistry  aBackground: Resin composite blocks (Grandio blocs) has been developed which are characterized by high filler loading (86%) as well as less chipping and crack introduction during manufacturing. Furthermore, they are more easily fabricated, do not require post-milling crystallization cycle as ceramics or additional curing cycle, easily repaired, compatible with milling machine and exhibit better marginal quality. They are also indicated in restoring large complex cavities. This would be the first randomized clinical trial to validate the clinical performance of Grandio CAD/CAM composite blocks in restoring badly broken vital teeth over 1 year. Aim: The current study was conducted to compare one-year clinical performance of indirect restoration fabricated from nano hybrid composite CAD/CAM blocks and ceramic blocks in restoration of badly broken vital teeth Methods and Materials: In two parallel groups (n= 42 restorations), 39 participants having badly broken vital teeth minimum of two remaining wall were randomly enrolled in this trial and received either resin composite blocks (Grandio, VOCO, Germany) or ceramic blocks (E.max). Fabricated restorations were cemented according to the manufacturers{u2019} instructions with the corresponding adhesive system. The restorations were assessed using modified USPHS criteria by two independent blinded assessors at baseline and 1-year follow up visits. Data was obtained and analyzed using Independent Student-t test, Chi-square and McNemar test for inter and intragroup comparisons. The significance level was set at P {u2264} 0.05.Results: All the 39 participants completed the trial. There was no statistically significant difference between both tested materials for all USPHS criteria except for cavo-surface marginal discoloration favoring Grandio blockson of badly broken vital posterior teeth  aIssued also as CD 4aAll ceramic restoration 4aCAD/CAM composite restoration 4aRandomized clinical trial0 aAdel Eltannir, eSupervising0 aAhmed Elzohairy , eSupervising0 aShereen Hafez Ibrahim , eSupervising  uhttp://172.23.153.220/th.pdf