000			03488cam a2200349 a 4500
003			EG-GiCUC
005			20250223032750.0
008			210616s2020 ua do f m 000 0 eng d
040			_aEG-GiCUC _beng _cEG-GiCUC
041	0		_aeng
049			_aDeposite
097			_aM.Sc
099			_aCai01.09.03.M.Sc.2020.Ha.O
100	0		_aHamsa Ashraf Elgebaly
245	1	0	_aOne-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 Ibrahim
246	1	5	_aدراسة سريرية عشوائية : _bالتقييم الإكلينيكى لمدة عام للترميمات الغير مباشرة المصممة بالكمبيوتر لمادة الكومبوزيت مقارنة بمادة السيراميك فى الاسنان المحطمة
260			_aCairo : _bHamsa Ashraf Elgebaly , _c2020
300			_a148 P. : _bcharts , photographs ; _c25cm
502			_aThesis (M.Sc.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine - Department of Operative Dentistry
520			_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
530			_aIssued also as CD
653		4	_aAll ceramic restoration
653		4	_aCAD/CAM composite restoration
653		4	_aRandomized clinical trial
700	0		_aAdel Eltannir, _eSupervising
700	0		_aAhmed Elzohairy , _eSupervising
700	0		_aShereen Hafez Ibrahim , _eSupervising
856			_uhttp://172.23.153.220/th.pdf
905			_aAmira _eCataloger
905			_aNazla _eRevisor
942			_2ddc _cTH
999			_c81307 _d81307