Clinical evaluation of bulk-fill and universal nanocomposites in class II cavities: Five-year results of a randomized clinical split-mouth trial

被引:9
|
作者
Schoilew, Kyrill [1 ,2 ]
Fazeli, Shila [1 ]
Felten, Anna [1 ]
Sekundo, Caroline [1 ]
Wolff, Diana [1 ]
Frese, Cornelia [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Heidelberg, Dent Sch, Dept Conservat Dent, Heidelberg, Germany
[2] Neuenheimer Feld 400, D-69120 Heidelberg, Germany
关键词
Bulk-fill; Composite resin; Dental material; Posterior; Randomized controlled trial; POSTERIOR COMPOSITE RESTORATIONS; RESIN COMPOSITES; LONGEVITY; CURE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104362
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Aim: Evaluating the clinical survival and quality parameters of class-II restorations using 3MTM FiltekTM Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative compared to 3MTM FiltekTM Supreme XTE Universal Restorative over a period of five years.Materials and methods: A longitudinal, randomized, prospective split-mouth study with 60 patients (29 female, 31 male; mean age 44 y; range 20-77 y) and a total of 120 load-bearing class II restorations (TEST: n=60 Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative; CONTROL: n=60 Filtek Supreme XTE Universal Restorative) was conducted. Clinical evaluation was performed by blinded evaluators according to FDI criteria. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis and an intergroup comparison (Mann-Whitney-U-Test) was carried out. A basic significance level of 0.05 was corrected by the Bonferroni method to account for multiple testing (significance after correction: p<0.00067).Results: The mean overall survival of restorations was 92% after 56.98 +/- 1.51 months in the TEST group (95 CI= 54.02;59.94) and 92% after 57.25 +/- 1.46 months (95 CI= 54.39; 60.12) in the CONTROL group (log-rank p=0.995). In total, four failures occurred in both TEST and CONTROL group during the observation period (mean annual failure rate: 1.6%). The most common reasons for failure were chipping-fractures, debonding, cracked-tooth-syndrome and recurrent decay. With regard to the FDI criteria, no significant differences between TEST and CONTROL material occurred for any of the evaluated variables. In the TEST group two restorations had to be repaired and two had to be replaced, in the CONTROL group four restorations had to be replaced.Conclusion: Both materials showed acceptable clinical performance and survival during the 5-year observation period.Clinical Significance: The use of a nanofilled bulk-fill composite proved to be an aesthetically, functionally and biologically satisfactory alternative in posterior dentition.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Five-year clinical evaluation of Dyract in small Class I cavities
    Demirci, M
    Sancakli, HS
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2006, 19 (01): : 41 - 46
  • [22] The influence of different placement techniques on the clinical success of bulk-fill resin composites placed in Class II cavities: a 4-year randomized controlled clinical study
    Kilinc, Nazire Nurdan Cakir
    Demirbuga, Sezer
    CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2023, 27 (02) : 541 - 557
  • [23] Clinical evaluation of the bulk fill composite QuiXfil in molar class I and II cavities: 10-year results of a RCT
    Heck, Katrin
    Manhart, Juergen
    Hickel, Reinhard
    Diegritz, Christian
    DENTAL MATERIALS, 2018, 34 (06) : E138 - E147
  • [24] Five-year survival of class II restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite: a retrospective cohort study
    Leinonen, Jukka
    Vaehaenikkilae, Hannu
    Luksepp, Remo
    Anttonen, Vuokko
    CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2024, 28 (10)
  • [25] Two-year clinical performance of dual- and light-cure bulk-fill resin composites in Class II restorations: a randomized clinical trial
    Elawsya, Mohamed Elshirbeny
    Montaser, Marmar Ahmed
    El-Wassefy, Noha Abdel-Mawla
    Zaghloul, Nadia Mohamed
    CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2024, 28 (02)
  • [26] Five-year Clinical Evaluation of a Nanofilled and a Nanohybrid Composite in Class IV Cavities
    Demirci, M.
    Tuncer, S.
    Sancakli, H. S.
    Tekce, N.
    Baydemir, C.
    OPERATIVE DENTISTRY, 2018, 43 (03) : 261 - 271
  • [27] A randomized, prospective clinical study evaluating effectiveness of a bulk-fill composite resin, a conventional composite resin and a reinforced glass ionomer in Class II cavities: one-year results
    Balkaya, Hacer
    Arslan, Soley
    Pala, Kansad
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED ORAL SCIENCE, 2019, 27
  • [28] Five-year clinical evaluation of universal adhesive applied following different bonding techniques: A randomized multicenter clinical trial
    Naupari-Villasante, Romina
    Matos, Thalita P.
    de Albuquerque, Elisa Gomes
    Warol, Flavio
    Tardem, Chane
    Calazans, Fernanda Signorelli
    Poubel, Luiz Augusto
    Reis, Alessandra
    Barceleiro, Marcos Oliveira
    Loguercio, Alessandro D.
    DENTAL MATERIALS, 2023, 39 (06) : 586 - 594
  • [29] Reliability of Class II Bulk-fill Composite Restorations With and Without Veneering: A Two-year Randomized Clinical Control Study
    Kaisarly, D.
    ElGezawi, M.
    Haridy, R.
    Elembaby, A.
    Aldegheishem, A.
    Alsheikh, R.
    Almulhim, K. S.
    OPERATIVE DENTISTRY, 2021, 46 (05) : 491 - 504
  • [30] Randomized prospective clinical trial of class II restorations using flowable bulk-fill resin composites: 4-year follow-up
    Isis Almela Endo Hoshino
    André Luiz Fraga Briso
    Lara Maria Bueno Esteves
    Paulo Henrique dos Santos
    Sandra Meira Borghi Frascino
    Ticiane Cestari Fagundes
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2022, 26 : 5697 - 5710