Den här översättningen är inte klar ännu. Den här sidan är just nu på engelska.

Gå till den engelska sidan

Cure My Disease

Don't miss your cure!

 Log in / Sign up

Which filling lasts longer in Kids' weak enamel? a Head-to-Head trial

NCT ID NCT07733804

Disease control Sponsor: Marmara University Source: ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

What the study statuses mean

This study's is highlighted.

Recruitment status, easiest to join first

Recruiting now
This trial is taking on new participants right now.
Not yet recruiting
Registered, but not yet taking participants.
By invitation only
Not open to general applications. Only people the study team invites can take part.
Paused
Paused for now. It may or may not start again.
Ongoing
Running, but no longer taking on new participants.
Completed This study
The trial has finished. Results may not be published yet.
Stopped early
Stopped early, before it reached the end. That can be for many reasons, including safety.
Cancelled
Cancelled before anyone took part.

Expanded access (not trials)

Expanded access
Not a trial. This treatment can be requested outside a study, case by case, for people who qualify.
Expanded access (paused)
Not a trial. The treatment can normally be requested outside a study, but is unavailable right now.
Expanded access (ended)
Not a trial. The treatment could once be requested outside a study, but no longer can.
Approved
The treatment has been approved, so it is available normally rather than through this programme.

When the status isn't known

Details not published
The full record has not been published yet, so there is little to show here.
Status unknown
This status has not been confirmed recently, so it may be out of date.

First seen Jul 29, 2026 · Last updated Jul 30, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This trial compares two dental filling materials—a glass hybrid and a composite with fiber reinforcement—in children whose first permanent molars have a condition called molar incisor hypomineralization (MIH), which causes weak, chalky enamel. The study aims to see which material holds up better over five years in terms of retention, decay prevention, and overall function. Participants receive both types of fillings in different teeth, allowing a direct comparison within each child.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance
dental restorative materials (glass hybrid and short fiber-reinforced composite with micro-hybrid composite)
What this could lead to
If one material outperforms the other, it could guide dentists toward more durable fillings for children with weak enamel, reducing the need for repeat treatments.
What could go wrong
This is a small, early-stage trial with only 31 participants, so results may not apply to all children. Both materials could perform similarly or fail over time.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Study facts

What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.

Phase

Not a phased trial

Phase numbers describe drug development. The registry uses this when they do not apply, as it does for trials of devices, procedures or behaviour changes, and for observational studies.

Participants

31 people

The number who actually took part.

Started

Apr 2020

Finished

Aug 2020

Lead sponsor

Other sponsor

The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.

Who can take part

This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.

Ages

6 to 12 years

Sex

Anyone

Healthy volunteers

Accepted

You do not need to have the condition being studied to take part.

Show the full entry requirements

Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.

Inclusion Criteria: * Cooperative children. * Good oral hygiene, no periodontal disease or bad habits. * The presence of at least two permanent molars with MIH involving dentin with a split-mouth design study according to the clinical and radiological examination. * Had a normal occlusal relationship with natural dentition, and had at least one adjacent tooth contact. * According to the split mouth working design, an equal number of teeth were selected from the right and left sides. Exclusion Criteria: * History of bruxism, known inability to return for recall appointments and allergies to ingredients of glass ionomer based restorative materials. * Cavity with restorations, hypoplasia, fracture or cracks, abrasion, erosion, abfraction, fistula, abscess or pathological mobility, pain, pulp exposure were excluded

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Molar incisor hypomineralization are added.

Vår säkerhetsrekommendation!

Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

Molar Hypomineralization

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Molar incisor hypomineralization

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • Marmara University Faculty of Dentistry Department of Pediatric Dentistry

    Istanbul, 34854, Turkey (Türkiye)

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.