Clinical and radiographic success of bioflex versus stainless steel crowns using the hall technique in primary molars: a 12-month randomized controlled trial.
Yousra Ramadan, Marwa Baraka, Jeffrey A Dean et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This two-arm randomized controlled trial compared BioFlex crowns (BFCs) with stainless-steel crowns (SSCs), both placed using the Hall Technique, in healthy children aged 4–6 years with carious mandibular second primary molars. At 12 months, clinical and radiographic success did not differ significantly: 91.9% with BFCs versus 94.6% with SSCs (RR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.86-1.10). BFCs were associated with greater child and parental satisfaction, while plaque accumulation was higher at later assessments. The authors describe BFCs as an esthetic alternative but note concerns about perforation risk and plaque.
Key findings
- At 12 months, success was 91.9% with BFCs and 94.6% with SSCs (RR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.86-1.10), with no significant difference.
- BFCs had higher plaque at 6 months (MD = 0.30) and 12 months (MD = 0.41).
- Child satisfaction favored BFCs (MD = - 0.67); parental satisfaction favored BFCs for color (MD = 1.73) and overall satisfaction (MD = 0.41).
- SSCs had a higher gingival index at 1 week (MD = - 0.32, 95% CI: -0.56--0.08).
Why it matters
The trial provides comparative short-term evidence on an esthetic crown option for primary molars treated with the Hall Technique. Similar observed success rates may be relevant when weighing crown appearance and satisfaction against plaque accumulation and the reported perforation concern. These outcomes help frame the trade-offs, while the limited follow-up means longer-term performance remains uncertain.
What to keep in mind
Follow-up was limited to 12 months, so longer-term success and perforation risk were not established.