Pure Ormocer vs Methacrylate Composites on Posterior Teeth: A Double-blinded Randomized Clinical Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 359-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
CRG Torres ◽  
MG Augusto ◽  
IF Mathias-Santamaria ◽  
R Di Nicoló ◽  
AB Borges
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Biological Properties ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Tooth Structure ◽  
Randomized Design ◽  
Double Blinded

Clinical Relevance The clinical behavior of pure ormocer composite is reliable when used in class II restorations after 24 months of evaluation. SUMMARY Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of class II restorations made using pure ormocer and methacrylate composites in a period of 24 months, using a split-mouth double-blinded randomized design. Methods and Materials: Thirty patients received two class II restorations (n=60) performed with different composites: GrandioSO (methacrylate, nanohybrid) and Admira Fusion (pure ormocer, nanohybrid). The universal adhesive system (Futurabond M+) was applied in all restorations using the self-etching mode. The composites were placed by the incremental technique. The restorations were evaluated using the FDI World Dental Federation criteria after 7 days and 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results: After 24 months, 23 patients attended the recall and 46 restorations were evaluated. Fisher's statistical analysis (5%) showed no difference between the materials. One pure ormocer restoration and one methacrylate restoration presented small fractures. Only one tooth suffered a fracture of the remaining tooth structure. Admira Fusion presented, respectively, 100%, 95.66%, and 100% of acceptable performance in general scores for esthetic, functional, and biological properties. GrandioSO presented, respectively, 100%, 91.31%, and 95.66% of acceptable performance in the same scores. Conclusion: After 24-month follow-up, nonsignificant differences between the tested composites was detected. Both materials provided acceptable clinical performance in class II restorations.

Three-year Randomized Prospective Clinical Trial of Class II Restorations Using Flowable Bulk-fill Resin Composites

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
MD Moda ◽  
AF Briso ◽  
IAE Hoshino ◽  
SMB Frascino ◽  
PH Santos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Oral Care ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Single Bond ◽  
Surface Staining ◽  
Equality Test ◽  
Over Time

SUMMARY Objectives: This randomized, prospective, and split-mouth study aimed to evaluate flowable bulk-fill resin composites in class II restorations and to compare with a conventional layering technique after a 3-year follow-up. Methods and Materials: Fifty-three subjects received three class II restorations according to the restorative systems: conventional microhybrid resin composite (PA, Peak Universal + Amelogen Plus, Ultradent), flowable bulk-fill and nanoparticulate resin composites (ABF, Adper Single Bond 2 + Filtek Bulk Fill Flow + Filtek Z350XT, 3M Oral Care), and flowable bulk-fill and microhybrid resin composites (XST, XP Bond + SDR + TPH3, Dentsply). The clinical performance and interproximal contacts were evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed using the equality test of two proportions, Logistic regression analysis, Friedman, Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney tests (α=0.05). Results: Forty-seven patients were evaluated at 3 years. XST bulk-fill restorative system presented higher marginal discoloration than PA, and the opposite occurred for surface staining. All restorative systems resulted in decreased interproximal contacts, occurring early for XST. Conclusions: Although the restorative system using incremental technique presented better performance for marginal discoloration, one of the restorative systems that used flowable bulk-fill resin composite (XST) showed the lowest surface staining. All restorative systems had decreased proximal contact over time.

One-Year Clinical Evaluation of Composite Restorations in Posterior Teeth: Effect of Adhesive Systems

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (6) ◽  
pp. E30-E37 ◽  
Author(s):  
RH Sundfeld ◽  
RS Scatolin ◽  
FG Oliveira ◽  
LS Machado ◽  
RS Alexandre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Marginal Integrity ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
One Year

SUMMARY This clinical study assessed the performance of posterior composite resins applied with the Adper™ Single Bond Plus (SB) and Adper™ Scotchbond SE (SE) adhesive systems and Filtek™ Supreme Plus composite resin, using modified US Public Health Service criteria. A total of 97 restorations were placed in posterior teeth by two calibrated operators. Application of the materials followed manufacturers' instructions. The restorations were evaluated by two examiners at baseline and after one year. Statistical analyses were conducted using the proportion test at a significance level of 5% (p<0.05). All the restorations evaluated (ie, 100%) received an alpha rating for the criteria of marginal discoloration and marginal integrity at baseline. At one year, for marginal discoloration, 64.6% of SB and 61.2% of SE received an alpha rating. For marginal integrity, 72.9% of SB and 77.6% of SE received an alpha rating. The other restorations received bravo ratings for both criteria. None of the teeth that received the restorative systems presented caries lesions around the restorations. A total of eight teeth presented postoperative sensitivity one week after baseline, five with SB and three with SE; the symptom had disappeared one year later. One year later, composite resin restorations using either adhesive system showed satisfactory clinical performance.

Clinical Performance and Wear Resistance of Two Compomers in Posterior Occlusal Restorations of Permanent Teeth: Six-Year Follow-up

10.2341/06-71 ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. G. Lund ◽  
F. P. Sehn ◽  
E. Piva ◽  
D. Detoni ◽  
F. R. R. Moura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Wear Resistance ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Occlusal Surface ◽  
Permanent Teeth ◽  
Posterior Teeth

Clinical Relevance The restoration quality has decreased and the wear increased for two compomers placed in the occlusal surface of permanent posterior teeth after six years; however, the restorations were clinically acceptable at the end of the evaluation.

Clinical Evaluation of a Silorane- and a Methacrylate-Based Resin Composite in Class II Restorations: 24-Month Results

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. E102-E110 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Karaman ◽  
AR Yazici ◽  
G Ozgunaltay ◽  
I Ustunkol ◽  
A Berber
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Restorative Materials ◽  
Chi Square Test ◽  
Self Etch

SUMMARY Objective: To compare the 24-month clinical performance of two different resin composites in class II slot restorations. Methods and Materials: Thirty-seven patients having at least two approximal carious lesions were enrolled in the study. A total of 116 teeth (58 pairs) were restored with either a silorane-based composite (Filtek Silorane) and its self-etch adhesive (Silorane Adhesive System, 3M ESPE) or a methacrylate-based packable resin composite (X-tra Fil) and its self-etch adhesive (Futurabond NR, VOCO GmbH) according to the toss of a coin. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and at six-, 12-, and 24-month recalls by two calibrated examiners according to the modified US Public Health Service criteria. The comparison of the two restorative materials for each category was performed with the Pearson chi-square test. Within group differences of the materials at different recall times were compared using the Cochran Q and Friedman tests. Bonferroni-adjusted McNemar test was used when significant difference was found (p<0.05). Results: After 24 months, no statistically significant differences were found between the two restorative materials for the criteria evaluated. Conclusions: Both silorane- and methacrylate-based resin composites showed clinically acceptable performance in class II slot restorations after 24 months.

Clinical Evaluation of a Two-step Etch&Rinse and a Two-step Self-etch Adhesive System in Class II Restorations: Two-year Results

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 656-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. B. Ermis ◽  
O. Kam ◽  
E. U. Celik ◽  
U. B. Temel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance The two-step etch&rinse and the two-step self-etch adhesive systems tested in this study demonstrated similar clinical performance in Class II cavities after two years.

scholarly journals Clinical Evaluation of Resin-Based Composites in Posterior Restorations: 12-Month Results

2010 ◽  
Vol 04 (01) ◽  
pp. 057-065 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cigdem Celik ◽  
Neslihan Arhun ◽  
Kivanc Yamanel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Class I ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Usphs Criteria ◽  
Nanohybrid Composite

ABSTRACTObjectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the 12 month clinical performances of two different posterior composites in Class I and Class II restorations.Methods: Thirty-one patients (10 male, 21 female) were recruited into the study. A total of 82 Class I and Class II cavities were restored with either a nanohybrid composite (Grandio) or a low-shrinkage composite (Quixfil), using their self etch adhesives (Futura Bond and Xeno III) according to manufacturers’ instructions. The restorations were clinically evaluated 1 week after placement as baseline, and after 6 and 12 months post-operatively using modified USPHS criteria by two previously calibrated operators. Statistical analysis were performed using Pearson Chi-square and Fisher’s Exact Test (P<.05).Results: All patients attended the 12-month recall. Lack of retention was not observed in any of the restorations. With respect to color match, marginal adaptation, secondary caries and surface texture, no significant differences were found between two restorative materials tested after 12 months (P>.05). None of the restorations had marginal discoloration and anatomic form loss on the 12 month follow-up. Restorations did not exhibit post-operative sensitivity at any evaluation period.Conclusions: Clinical assessment of nanohybrid (Grandio) and low-shrinkage posterior composite (Quixfil) exhibited good clinical results with predominating alpha scores after 12 months. However; further evaluations are necessary for the long-term clinical performance of these materials. (Eur J Dent 2010;4:57-65)

Thirty-Six-Month Clinical Comparison of Bulk Fill and Nanofill Composite Restorations

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (5) ◽  
pp. 478-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
AR Yazici ◽  
SA Antonson ◽  
ZB Kutuk ◽  
E Ergin
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Recall Rate ◽  
Retention Rates ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Chi Square Test

SUMMARY Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a nanofill and a bulk fill resin composite in class II restorations. Methods and Materials: In accordance with a split-mouth design, 50 patients received at least one pair of restorations, restored with a nanofill resin composite (Filtek Ultimate [FU]) and with a bulk fill resin composite (Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill [TB]). Each restorative resin was used with its respective adhesive system according to the manufacturers' instructions. A total of 104 class II restorations were placed by two operators. The restorations were blindly evaluated by two examiners at baseline and at six, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months using modified US Public Health Service Ryge criteria. The comparison of the two restorative materials for each category was performed with the chi-square test (α=0.05). The baseline scores were compared with those at the recall visits using the Cochran Q-test. Results: At six, 12, 18, and 24 months, the recall rate was 100%, 98%, 94%, and 82%, respectively, with a retention rate of 100%. At 36 months, 81 restorations were evaluated in 39 patients with a recall rate of 78%. For marginal adaptation, four restorations from the TB group and 10 from the FU group rated as Bravo. Two restorations from the TB and eight restorations from the FU group showed marginal discoloration. There were statistically significant differences between the two restorative resins in terms of marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration (p&lt;0.05). No differences were observed between the restorative resins in terms of retention (p&gt;0.05). One restored tooth from the FU group was crowned. The retention rates for the TB and the FU groups were 100%. In the FU group, two restorations showed slightly rough surfaces, and two showed a slight mismatch in color. None of the restorations showed postoperative sensitivity, secondary caries, or loss of anatomic form. Conclusions: The tested bulk fill restorative resin demonstrated better clinical performance in terms of marginal discoloration and marginal adaptation.

scholarly journals Clinical Feasibility of Fully Sintered (Y, Nb)-TZP for CAD-CAM Single-Unit Restoration: A Pilot Study

Materials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. 2762
Author(s):  
Ki-Won Jeong ◽  
Hyung-In Yoon ◽  
Jae-Hyun Lee ◽  
In-Sung Luke Yeo ◽  
Dae-Joon Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Unit ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Tetragonal Zirconia ◽  
Biological Properties ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Probing Depth ◽  
Acceptable Quality ◽  
Cad Cam ◽  
Periodontal Probing

Fifteen participants (9 male, 6 female) received a total of 15 monolithic single restorations made from fully sintered (Y, Nb)-TZP (tetragonal zirconia polycrystal) block. The restorations were clinically evaluated for survival, success rate, and periodontal probing depths 6 months after the insertion of the restorations. Esthetic, functional, and biological evaluations were also performed over a 6-month follow-up period. The survival and success rates of the single-unit restorations were 100%. The periodontal probing depth values ranged from 1 to 3 mm. No complications with regard to functional and biological properties were observed after 6 months. The postoperative sensitivity was only a transient phenomenon. The fully sintered (Y, Nb)-TZP single-unit restoration showed highly acceptable quality with successful clinical performance over 6 months.

scholarly journals Clinical Evaluation of Fiber-Reinforced Composite Restorations in Posterior Teeth - Results of 2.5 Year Follow-up

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 476-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Tanner ◽  
Mimmi Tolvanen ◽  
Sufyan Garoushi ◽  
Eija Säilynoja
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Fiber Composite ◽  
Short Fiber ◽  
Fiber Reinforced ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Fiber Reinforced Composite ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Reinforced Composite ◽  
Short Fiber Composite

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of posterior composite restorations reinforced by bulk base of short-fiber composite (everX Posterior, GC Corporation). Methods: Thirty-six short fiber-reinforced composite restorations were placed in premolar and molar teeth of 33 patients. Eight of the teeth were vital and 28 were non-vital. Average follow up time of the restorations was 30.6 months (2.5 years), ranging from 16.2 to 51.3 months (1.3 - 4.3 years). Results: One restoration failed during the follow-up period due to secondary caries, at time point 39.5 months. Three fillings had minor fractures during the follow-up. The overall survival rate of the restorations was 97.2% and success rate (no maintenance needed) was 88.9%, respectively. Conclusion: Posterior composite restorations with a bulk base of short-fiber composite showed good clinical performance in the short term evaluation.

scholarly journals Universal Adhesive Systems in Class II Amalgam Restorations

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 126
Author(s):  
Armiliana Soares Nascimento ◽  
Eliana Alves De Lima ◽  
Yasmine De Carvalho Souza ◽  
Joseane Delfino Canto ◽  
Marcia De Almeida Durão ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Acrylic Resin ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Universal Adhesive ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
Nail Polish ◽  
Group I ◽  
Root Apices

Objective: to assess the effectiveness of adhesive system in reducing microleakage in Class II amalgam restorations.Methods: The teeth were divided randomly into 3 equal groups: Group I was the control experiment (Copal Vanish); Group II: single Bond Universal 3M-ESPE (with and without acid – 37%); and Group III: All Bond Universal – BISCO (with and without acid – 37%), after the amalgam was condensed. The root apices were then sealed with acrylic resin and stored for 24 hours in 100% humidity. After storage, the specimens were subjected to 500 cycles of thermocycling (5°C and 55°C). The teeth were isolated with cosmetic nail polish and were immersed in 0.5 basic fuchsin dye for 24 hours. The teeth then were sectioned with a diamond disc and observed under a stereomicroscope. Microleakage was assessed using a 0-3 scale of dye penetration. The data was analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test (p<0.05).Results: The microleakage scores revealed less leakage in the experimental groups than in the control group. The microleakage for the adhesives without acid conditioning was reduced, although no statistical significance was recorded (p<0.05).Conclusion: The immediate adhesive material acted effectively as a barrier for microleakage when it was applied without acid.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document