Clinical Performance of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With EndocrownsEndocrownsNCT07708077
Clinical Performance and Fit of 3D-Printed Versus Milled Endocrowns: An 18-Month Trial
A study testing Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks. and Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturing in people with Clinical Performance of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With Endocrowns and Restoration Fit of Endodontically Treated Teeth With Endocrowns, run by October 6 University at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether 3D-printed resin composite endocrowns perform as well as milled resin composite endocrowns in restoring endodontically treated teeth. It will also learn how well the restorations fit over time. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 20 to 40 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Clinical Performance of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With Endocrowns, Restoration Fit of Endodontically Treated Teeth With Endocrowns
- What is being tested?
- Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks. and Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturing
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 52 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 1 Nov 2026to 1 Dec 2028
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 20 to 40 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Patient-Related Criteria
- Age: Between 20 and 40 years.
- Oral Hygiene: Good oral hygiene, evidenced by low plaque and gingival index scores.
- Willingness to attend regular follow-up visits during the study period
- Tooth-Related Criteria
- Endodontic Quality: High-quality root canal treatment with no clinical or radiographic signs of pathology.
Show all 9Show fewer
- Tooth Type: A permanent molar tooth requiring an endocrown after successful root canal treatment.
- Located in functional occlusion and opposing natural teeth in stable occlusal contact with the restored tooth.
- Teeth free from cracks, fractures, or internal resorption; supporting tissues without structural defects that may compromise restoration success
Who cannot join
- Patient-Related Criteria
- Parafunctional Habits: Severe bruxism, clenching, or other parafunctional habits.
- Allergies: to any study materials (e.g., resin composites, bonding agents).
- Patients with systemic diseases contraindicate elective dental treatment (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes)
- Tooth-Related Criteria
- Insufficient Tooth Structure: Less than 2mm of circumferential sound denting height or deep, unrestorable.
Show all 9Show fewer
- Tooth opposes prosthetic restoration.
- Teeth with a history of fixed prosthetic restorations (previous crowns, inlays/onlays, or bridge restorations)
- Periodontal Issues: Active periodontal disease, excessive mobility (> Grade 1, or a hopeless long-term prognosis.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Egypt1 site
October city, October 6 university
Giza, 12556
Yara Ahmed Elgammal, Assistant Lecturer, 01157564592, yara.elgammal.dent@o6u.edu.eg
Monaliza Maher Abdelaziz, Assistant Professor, 01001400248, monalizamaher.dent@o6u.edu.eg
About this study
Official title: Clinical Performance and Restoration Fit of 3D-Printed Versus Milled Biomimetic Resin Composite Endocrowns: 18-Month Randomized Clinical Trial.
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether 3D-printed resin composite endocrowns perform as well as milled resin composite endocrowns in restoring endodontically treated teeth. It will also learn how well the restorations fit over time.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Read more
Do 3D-printed endocrowns and milled endocrowns show different clinical performance? Do 3D-printed endocrowns and milled endocrowns differ in restoration fit over 18 months?
Researchers will compare two fabrication methods:
Additive manufacturing: 3D-printed resin composite endocrowns. Subtractive manufacturing: milled resin composite endocrowns.
Participants will:
Be recruited from the Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, October 6 University.
Receive tooth preparation after confirmation of satisfactory root canal treatment.
Have their teeth prepared using standardized endocrown guidelines by one calibrated operator.
Have digital scans taken of the prepared tooth, opposing arch, and bite registration.
Have restorations designed digitally and then assigned randomly to one of the two groups.
Receive a temporary restoration until the final endocrown is ready.
Have the final restoration tried in for fit, contacts, and occlusion before cementation.
Have a baseline post-cementation scan taken for fit assessment.
Return for follow-up visits at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, and 18 months.
Be evaluated at each visit using Modified FDI criteria and 3D digital superimposition for fit analysis.
Read the detailed description
Eligible participants will be recruited from the Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, October 6 University.
Following confirmation of satisfactory root canal treatment. Tooth preparation will follow standardized endocrown guidelines. All preparations will be performed by a single calibrated operator (Y.A.E.).
Full-arch digital impressions will be captured using an intraoral scanner, including scans of the prepared tooth, opposing arch, and bite registration. Digital files (STL format) will be used to design definitive restorations in CAD software. Following digital design, participants will be randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to one of two fabrication groups:
Group 1 (Intervention): Additive manufacturing (3D-printed resin composite) Group 2 (Comparator): Subtractive manufacturing (milled resin composite) Teeth will be temporized with intermediate restorative material, then temporary materials will be removed and preparations cleaned. Restorations will be tried to verify fit, contacts, and occlusion.
After cementation, scan the seated restoration with the same intraoral scanner to create baseline restoration STL file (T0) for longitudinal fit assessment. Participants will be recalled at baseline (T0), 6 months (T1), 12 months (T2) and18 months (T3). At each visit, restorations will be evaluated using Modified FDI criteria (clinical performance) and 3D digital superimposition (Restoration fit via Geomagic Control X)
- Conditions
- Clinical Performance of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With Endocrowns, Restoration Fit of Endodontically Treated Teeth With Endocrowns
- Being tested
- Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks., Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturing
- Keywords
- 3D-printed endocrown, Milled endocrown, Biomimetic resin composite, Endodontically treated molar, Clinical performance, Restoration fit and 18-month follow-up.
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks.Other
Subtractive Manufacturing, the control group will utilize restorations fabricated via subtractive manufacturing, specifically by milling from industrially fabricated blocks of nanohybrid composite. This method is the established gold standard for producing CAD/CAM resin composite restorations. It is known for creating restorations with excellent mechanical properties, high density, and predictable clinical performance due to the optimized, industrial-grade polymerization of the blocks. These materials, which include polymer-infiltrated ceramic networks (PICNs) and resin nanoceramics, were developed to combine the favorable properties of both ceramics and resin composites, offering a biomimetic alternative to traditional glass-ceramics.
Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturingOther
Additive Manufacturing, the intervention group will feature restorations fabricated via 3D printing. This technology is more time and cost-efficient, more accurate, and could provide a considerable alternative to the currently applied CNC milling, reduced material waste, and the ability to create complex geometries with high precision. Recent studies have shown that 3D-printed restorations can achieve promising results in terms of marginal and internal fit, which are critical for clinical longevity. This has spurred the development of novel, ceramic-filled hybrid materials specifically engineered for permanent 3D-printed restorations. Manufacturers of these materials claim high dimensional stability, flexural strength, and a modulus suitable for definitive restorations (e.g., Bego; VarseoSmile Triniq technical product data sheet). However, there is a lack of clinical data to support these claims.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks. | Other | Subtractive Manufacturing, the control group will utilize restorations fabricated via subtractive manufacturing, specifically by milling from industrially fabricated blocks of nanohybrid composite. This method is the established gold standard for producing CAD/CAM resin composite restorations. It is known for creating restorations with excellent mechanical properties, high density, and predictable clinical performance due to the optimized, industrial-grade polymerization of the blocks. These materials, which include polymer-infiltrated ceramic networks (PICNs) and resin nanoceramics, were developed to combine the favorable properties of both ceramics and resin composites, offering a biomimetic alternative to traditional glass-ceramics. Receives: Other: Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks.; Other: Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturing |
| Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturi | Other | Additive Manufacturing, the intervention group will feature restorations fabricated via 3D printing. This technology is more time and cost-efficient, more accurate, and could provide a considerable alternative to the currently applied CNC milling, reduced material waste, and the ability to create complex geometries with high precision. Recent studies have shown that 3D-printed restorations can achieve promising results in terms of marginal and internal fit, which are critical for clinical longevity. This has spurred the development of novel, ceramic-filled hybrid materials specifically engineered for permanent 3D-printed restorations. Manufacturers of these materials claim high dimensional stability, flexural strength, and a modulus suitable for definitive restorations (e.g., Bego; VarseoSmile Triniq technical product data sheet). However, there is a lack of clinical data to support these claims. Receives: Other: Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks.; Other: Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturing |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Clinical performance
World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria set to evaluate direct and indirect dental restorations: Hickel et al. (2023).
Aesthetic properties of Endocrown restorations (Domain A):
- Surface Luster
- Staining (surface, margin)
- color match and translucency
- Esthetic anatomical form Functional performance of Endocrown restorations (Domain F):
- Fracture of material and retention
- Marginal adaptation
- Approximal anatomical form Biological Properties of Endocrown restorations (Domain B):
- Recurrence of caries (CAR)
- Tooth integrity (enamel cracks, tooth fracture)
- Periodontal response
Measured: T0=baseline (1st week), T1=6 months, T2=12 months and T3=18 months follow-up.
Secondary outcomes (1)
Restoration Fit
- Marginal Adaptation
- Internal Adaptation Triple-scan digital superimposition (Geomagic Control X 2022 software)
Measured: T0=baseline (1st week), T1=6 months, T2=12 months and T3=18 months follow-up.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Jul 2026
- Study start1 Nov 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion1 Nov 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Dec 2028 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Clinical Performance of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With EndocrownsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 52 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- October 6 University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Yara Ahmed Elgammal, October 6 University
- Investigators
- Mohsen Hussein Abielhassan, • Professor, Conservative Dent, Study director, October 6 University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07708077
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- RECO6U/14-2026
- Acronym
- Endocrowns
- Status last verified
- Jul 2026
- First submitted
- 12 Jul 2026
- Last updated
- 21 Jul 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
7. Cal, I. K., Ozturk, F., Aydin, N., & Karaoglanoglu, S. (2024). 3D Printed Restorations Produced From Permanent Resin: Case Report. International Dental Journal, 74, S298. 10.1016/j.identj.2024.07.282 8. Doumit, M., Beuer, F., Böse, M. W. H., Unkovskiy, A., Hey, J., & Prause, E. (2025). Wear behavior of 3D printed, minimally invasive restorations: Clinical data after 24 months in function. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 134(3), 662-669. 10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.03.014 9. Güntekin, N., & Tunçdemir, A. R. (2024). Comparison of volumetric loss and surface roughness of composite dental restorations obtained by additive and subtractive manufacturing methods. Heliyon, 10(4). 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26269 10. Hickel, R., Mesinger, S., Opdam, N., Loomans, B., Frankenberger, R., Cadenaro, M., . & Kühnisch, J. (2023). Revised FDI criteria for evaluating direct and indirect dental restorations-recommendations for its clinical use, interpretation, and reporting. Clinical oral investigations, 27(6), 2573-2592. 10.1007/s00784-022- 04814-1 11. Kader, İ. T., Özer, S., & Arıcan, B. (2025). The effect of different fit-indicating materials and preparation designs on the marginal and internal fit of 3D-printed permanent endocrowns. Meandros Medical And Dental Journal, 26(1), 108-116. 10.69601/meandrosmdj.1596545 12. Koyuturk, A. E., Ozmen, B., Tokay, U., Tuloglu, N., Sari, M. E., & Sonmez, T. T. (2013). Two-year follow-up of indirect posterior composite restorations of permanent teeth with excessive material loss in pediatric patients: a clinical study. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, 15(6). 10.3290/j.jad.a30897 13. Mahran, G. A., El-Banna, A., & El-Korashy, D. I. (2025). Evaluation of a 3Dprinted nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength, wear and color stability. BMC Oral Health, 25(1), 572. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-05861-2
1.Abad-Coronel, C., Durán Urdiales, D., Benalcázar Arias, M. V., Córdova, A. K., Medina, M. S., & Bravo Torres, W. (2025). Flexural strength, fatigue behavior, and microhardness of three-dimensional (3D)-printed resin material for indirect restorations: A systematic review. Materials, 18(3), 556. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18030556 2. Abou-steit, S. S., Salem, M. A., Omar, S., & Mahmoud, N. (2024). Clinical evaluation of the biomimetic aspect in the restoration of endodontically treated teeth (Randomized clinical trial). Egyptian Dental Journal, 70(3), 2683-2693. 10.21608/EDJ.2024.291267.3045 3. Abuabboud, O., Marinescu, A. G., Paven, M., Kovacs, I. M., Nica, L. M., Faur, A. B., & Jivănescu, A. (2025). Influence of Cement Thickness, Dentine Thickness, and Intracoronal Depth on the Fracture Resistance of 3D-Printed Endocrowns: A Pilot In Vitro Study. Dentistry Journal, 13(6), 263. 10.3390/dj13060263 23 4. Albrecht, M., Schmidt, F., Menzel, F., Yassine, J., Beuer, F., & Unkovskiy, A. (2024). Comparative Analysis of Modern 3D-Printed Hybrid Resin-Ceramic Materials for Indirect Restorations: An In Vitro Study. Polymers,16(22), 3161. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16223161 5. Alghauli, M. A., & Alqutaibi, A. Y. (2024). 3D-printed intracoronal restorations, occlusal and laminate veneers: Clinical relevance, properties, and behavior compared to milled restorations; a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, 36(8), 1153-1170. 10.1111/jerd.13228 6. Arslan, S., Karagön, M., Balkaya, H., & Köse, B. (2024). A randomized clinical study evaluating the 30-month clinical performance of class II indirect restorations in endodontically treated teeth using ceramic, hybrid, and composite computer-aided design/computer-aided production blocks. Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, 27(1), 68-75. 10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_213_23
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Jul 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Clinical Performance and Restoration Fit of 3D-Printed Versus Milled Biomimetic Resin Composite Endocrowns: 18-Month Randomized Clinical Trial.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07708077
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Endocrowns / RECO6U/14-2026
- Conditions
- Clinical Performance of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With Endocrowns, Restoration Fit of Endodontically Treated Teeth With Endocrowns
- Keywords
- 3D-printed endocrown, Milled endocrown, Biomimetic resin composite, Endodontically treated molar, Clinical performance, Restoration fit and 18-month follow-up.
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 52 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- October 6 UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Nov 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 1 Nov 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Dec 2028 (estimated)
- First posted
- 16 Jul 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether 3D-printed resin composite endocrowns perform as well as milled resin composite endocrowns in restoring endodontically treated teeth. It will also learn how well the restorations fit over time.
The main questions it aims to answer are:
Do 3D-printed endocrowns and milled endocrowns show different clinical performance? Do 3D-printed endocrowns and milled endocrowns differ in restoration fit over 18 months?
Researchers will compare two fabrication methods:
Additive manufacturing: 3D-printed resin composite endocrowns. Subtractive manufacturing: milled resin composite endocrowns.
Participants will:
Be recruited from the Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, October 6 University.
Receive tooth preparation after confirmation of satisfactory root canal treatment.
Have their teeth prepared using standardized endocrown guidelines by one calibrated operator.
Have digital scans taken of the prepared tooth, opposing arch, and bite registration.
Have restorations designed digitally and then assigned randomly to one of the two groups.
Receive a temporary restoration until the final endocrown is ready.
Have the final restoration tried in for fit, contacts, and occlusion before cementation.
Have a baseline post-cementation scan taken for fit assessment.
Return for follow-up visits at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, and 18 months.
Be evaluated at each visit using Modified FDI criteria and 3D digital superimposition for fit analysis.
Detailed description
Eligible participants will be recruited from the Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, October 6 University.
Following confirmation of satisfactory root canal treatment. Tooth preparation will follow standardized endocrown guidelines. All preparations will be performed by a single calibrated operator (Y.A.E.).
Full-arch digital impressions will be captured using an intraoral scanner, including scans of the prepared tooth, opposing arch, and bite registration. Digital files (STL format) will be used to design definitive restorations in CAD software. Following digital design, participants will be randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to one of two fabrication groups:
Group 1 (Intervention): Additive manufacturing (3D-printed resin composite) Group 2 (Comparator): Subtractive manufacturing (milled resin composite) Teeth will be temporized with intermediate restorative material, then temporary materials will be removed and preparations cleaned. Restorations will be tried to verify fit, contacts, and occlusion.
After cementation, scan the seated restoration with the same intraoral scanner to create baseline restoration STL file (T0) for longitudinal fit assessment. Participants will be recalled at baseline (T0), 6 months (T1), 12 months (T2) and18 months (T3). At each visit, restorations will be evaluated using Modified FDI criteria (clinical performance) and 3D digital superimposition (Restoration fit via Geomagic Control X)
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks. | Other | Other: Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks., Other: Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturingSubtractive Manufacturing, the control group will utilize restorations fabricated via subtractive manufacturing, specifically by milling from industrially fabricated blocks of nanohybrid composite. This method is the established gold standard for producing CAD/CAM resin composite restorations. It is known for creating restorations with excellent mechanical properties, high density, and predictable clinical performance due to the optimized, industrial-grade polymerization of the blocks. These materials, which include polymer-infiltrated ceramic networks (PICNs) and resin nanoceramics, were developed to combine the favorable properties of both ceramics and resin composites, offering a biomimetic alternative to traditional glass-ceramics. |
| Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturi | Other | Other: Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks., Other: Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturingAdditive Manufacturing, the intervention group will feature restorations fabricated via 3D printing. This technology is more time and cost-efficient, more accurate, and could provide a considerable alternative to the currently applied CNC milling, reduced material waste, and the ability to create complex geometries with high precision. Recent studies have shown that 3D-printed restorations can achieve promising results in terms of marginal and internal fit, which are critical for clinical longevity. This has spurred the development of novel, ceramic-filled hybrid materials specifically engineered for permanent 3D-printed restorations. Manufacturers of these materials claim high dimensional stability, flexural strength, and a modulus suitable for definitive restorations (e.g., Bego; VarseoSmile Triniq technical product data sheet). However, there is a lack of clinical data to support these claims. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 20 to 40 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Patient-Related Criteria
- Age: Between 20 and 40 years.
- Oral Hygiene: Good oral hygiene, evidenced by low plaque and gingival index scores.
- Willingness to attend regular follow-up visits during the study period
- Endodontic Quality: High-quality root canal treatment with no clinical or radiographic signs of pathology.
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Patient-Related Criteria
- Parafunctional Habits: Severe bruxism, clenching, or other parafunctional habits.
- Allergies: to any study materials (e.g., resin composites, bonding agents).
- Patients with systemic diseases contraindicate elective dental treatment (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes)
- Insufficient Tooth Structure: Less than 2mm of circumferential sound denting height or deep, unrestorable.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks.Subtractive Manufacturing, the control group will utilize restorations fabricated via subtractive manufacturing, specifically by milling from industrially fabricated blocks of nanohybrid composite. This method is the established gold standard for producing CAD/CAM resin composite restorations. It is known for creating restorations with excellent mechanical properties, high density, and predictable clinical performance due to the optimized, industrial-grade polymerization of the blocks. These materials, which include polymer-infiltrated ceramic networks (PICNs) and resin nanoceramics, were developed to combine the favorable properties of both ceramics and resin composites, offering a biomimetic alternative to traditional glass-ceramics. | Other | Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks., Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturi |
| Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturingAdditive Manufacturing, the intervention group will feature restorations fabricated via 3D printing. This technology is more time and cost-efficient, more accurate, and could provide a considerable alternative to the currently applied CNC milling, reduced material waste, and the ability to create complex geometries with high precision. Recent studies have shown that 3D-printed restorations can achieve promising results in terms of marginal and internal fit, which are critical for clinical longevity. This has spurred the development of novel, ceramic-filled hybrid materials specifically engineered for permanent 3D-printed restorations. Manufacturers of these materials claim high dimensional stability, flexural strength, and a modulus suitable for definitive restorations (e.g., Bego; VarseoSmile Triniq technical product data sheet). However, there is a lack of clinical data to support these claims. | Other | Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks., Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturi |
Primary outcome
Clinical performance
Time frame: T0=baseline (1st week), T1=6 months, T2=12 months and T3=18 months follow-up.
World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria set to evaluate direct and indirect dental restorations: Hickel et al. (2023). Aesthetic properties of Endocrown restorations (Domain A): 1. Surface Luster 2. Staining (surface, margin) 3. color match and translucency 4. Esthetic anatomical form Functional performance of Endocrown restorations (Domain F): 5. Fracture of material and retention 6. Marginal adaptation 7. Approximal anatomical form Biological Properties of Endocrown restorations (Domain B): 8. Recurrence of caries (CAR) 9. Tooth integrity (enamel cracks, tooth fracture) 10. Periodontal response
1 secondary outcome
Restoration Fit
Time frame: T0=baseline (1st week), T1=6 months, T2=12 months and T3=18 months follow-up.
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Jul 2026.
- Results publication7. Cal, I. K., Ozturk, F., Aydin, N., & Karaoglanoglu, S. (2024). 3D Printed Restorations Produced From Permanent Resin: Case Report. International Dental Journal, 74, S298. 10.1016/j.identj.2024.07.282 8. Doumit, M., Beuer, F., Böse, M. W. H., Unkovskiy, A., Hey, J., & Prause, E. (2025). Wear behavior of 3D printed, minimally invasive restorations: Clinical data after 24 months in function. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 134(3), 662-669. 10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.03.014 9. Güntekin, N., & Tunçdemir, A. R. (2024). Comparison of volumetric loss and surface roughness of composite dental restorations obtained by additive and subtractive manufacturing methods. Heliyon, 10(4). 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26269 10. Hickel, R., Mesinger, S., Opdam, N., Loomans, B., Frankenberger, R., Cadenaro, M., . & Kühnisch, J. (2023). Revised FDI criteria for evaluating direct and indirect dental restorations-recommendations for its clinical use, interpretation, and reporting. Clinical oral investigations, 27(6), 2573-2592. 10.1007/s00784-022- 04814-1 11. Kader, İ. T., Özer, S., & Arıcan, B. (2025). The effect of different fit-indicating materials and preparation designs on the marginal and internal fit of 3D-printed permanent endocrowns. Meandros Medical And Dental Journal, 26(1), 108-116. 10.69601/meandrosmdj.1596545 12. Koyuturk, A. E., Ozmen, B., Tokay, U., Tuloglu, N., Sari, M. E., & Sonmez, T. T. (2013). Two-year follow-up of indirect posterior composite restorations of permanent teeth with excessive material loss in pediatric patients: a clinical study. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, 15(6). 10.3290/j.jad.a30897 13. Mahran, G. A., El-Banna, A., & El-Korashy, D. I. (2025). Evaluation of a 3Dprinted nanohybrid resin composite versus a milled resin composite for flexural strength, wear and color stability. BMC Oral Health, 25(1), 572. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-05861-2
- Results publication1.Abad-Coronel, C., Durán Urdiales, D., Benalcázar Arias, M. V., Córdova, A. K., Medina, M. S., & Bravo Torres, W. (2025). Flexural strength, fatigue behavior, and microhardness of three-dimensional (3D)-printed resin material for indirect restorations: A systematic review. Materials, 18(3), 556. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18030556 2. Abou-steit, S. S., Salem, M. A., Omar, S., & Mahmoud, N. (2024). Clinical evaluation of the biomimetic aspect in the restoration of endodontically treated teeth (Randomized clinical trial). Egyptian Dental Journal, 70(3), 2683-2693. 10.21608/EDJ.2024.291267.3045 3. Abuabboud, O., Marinescu, A. G., Paven, M., Kovacs, I. M., Nica, L. M., Faur, A. B., & Jivănescu, A. (2025). Influence of Cement Thickness, Dentine Thickness, and Intracoronal Depth on the Fracture Resistance of 3D-Printed Endocrowns: A Pilot In Vitro Study. Dentistry Journal, 13(6), 263. 10.3390/dj13060263 23 4. Albrecht, M., Schmidt, F., Menzel, F., Yassine, J., Beuer, F., & Unkovskiy, A. (2024). Comparative Analysis of Modern 3D-Printed Hybrid Resin-Ceramic Materials for Indirect Restorations: An In Vitro Study. Polymers,16(22), 3161. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16223161 5. Alghauli, M. A., & Alqutaibi, A. Y. (2024). 3D-printed intracoronal restorations, occlusal and laminate veneers: Clinical relevance, properties, and behavior compared to milled restorations; a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, 36(8), 1153-1170. 10.1111/jerd.13228 6. Arslan, S., Karagön, M., Balkaya, H., & Köse, B. (2024). A randomized clinical study evaluating the 30-month clinical performance of class II indirect restorations in endodontically treated teeth using ceramic, hybrid, and composite computer-aided design/computer-aided production blocks. Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, 27(1), 68-75. 10.4103/JCDE.JCDE_213_23
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Mohsen Hussein Abielhassan, • Professor, Conservative Dent study director
October 6 University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Milled resin composite restorations fabricated using subtractive manufacturing from CAD/CAM blocks. and Three dimensionally (3D) printed resin composite restorations fabricated using additive manufacturing in people with Clinical Performance of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With Endocrowns and Restoration Fit of Endodontically Treated Teeth With Endocrowns, run by October 6 University at 1 site in Egypt.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 9 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Jul 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Egypt. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Yara Ahmed Elgammal, Assistant Lecturer (+201157564592, yara.elgammal.dent@o6u.edu.eg), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Clinical performance (time frame: T0=baseline (1st week), T1=6 months, T2=12 months and T3=18 months follow-up.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07708077, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 21 Jul 2026.