Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: 12-month results
- PMID: 20046481
- PMCID: PMC2798791
Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: 12-month results
Abstract
Objectives: 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.
Keywords: Clinical evaluation; Nanohybrid composites; Posterior composites.
Similar articles
-
Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: two-year results.Oper Dent. 2010 Jul-Aug;35(4):397-404. doi: 10.2341/09-345-C. Oper Dent. 2010. PMID: 20672723 Clinical Trial.
-
Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: a 3-year study.Med Princ Pract. 2014;23(5):453-9. doi: 10.1159/000364874. Epub 2014 Aug 12. Med Princ Pract. 2014. PMID: 25115230 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical evaluation of a nanohybrid and a flowable resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions: 24-month results.J Adhes Dent. 2012 Aug;14(5):485-92. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a27794. J Adhes Dent. 2012. PMID: 22724113 Clinical Trial.
-
Clinical evaluation of a self-adhering flowable composite as occlusal restorative material in primary molars: one-year results.Eur Oral Res. 2019 Sep;53(3):119-124. doi: 10.26650/eor.20190025. Epub 2019 Sep 1. Eur Oral Res. 2019. PMID: 31579892 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical evaluation of the posterior composite Quixfil in class I and II cavities: 4-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.J Adhes Dent. 2010 Jun;12(3):237-43. doi: 10.3290/j.jad.a17551. J Adhes Dent. 2010. PMID: 20157663 Clinical Trial.
Cited by
-
Evaluation of Post-Operative Sensitivity of Bulk Fill Resin Composite versus Nano Resin Composite: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study.Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2019 Jul 26;7(14):2335-2342. doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2019.656. eCollection 2019 Jul 30. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2019. PMID: 31592052 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical effectiveness of alkasite versus nanofilled resin composite in the restoration of occlusal carious lesions in permanent molar teeth of children: a randomized clinical trial.Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2023 Jun;24(3):301-311. doi: 10.1007/s40368-023-00788-0. Epub 2023 Mar 22. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2023. PMID: 36947344 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Effect of bleaching gels on surface roughness of nanofilled composite resins.Eur J Dent. 2011 Apr;5(2):173-9. Eur J Dent. 2011. PMID: 21494385 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of operator variability on microleakage with different adhesive systems.Eur J Dent. 2013 Sep;7(Suppl 1):S060-S065. doi: 10.4103/1305-7456.119075. Eur J Dent. 2013. PMID: 24966730 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of fiber-reinforced composite and nanohybrid resin impregnated with glass fibers as postendodontic restoration in molars - A clinical study.J Conserv Dent. 2021 Sep-Oct;24(5):514-518. doi: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_147_21. Epub 2022 Mar 7. J Conserv Dent. 2021. PMID: 35399767 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Gerbo L, Leinfelder KF, Mueninghoff L, Russell C. Use of optical standards for determining wear of posterior composite resins. J Esthet Dent. 1990;2:148–152. - PubMed
-
- Leinfelder KF. Posterior composite resins: the materials and their clinical performance. J Am Dent Assoc. 1995;126:663–672. - PubMed
-
- Manhart J, Chen HY, Hickel R.Three-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial of the posterior composite QuiXfil in class I and II cavities Clin Oral Investig 2008. DOI:10.1007/s00784-008-0233-5) - PubMed
-
- Mitra SB, Wu D, Holmes BN. An application of nanotechnology in advanced dental materials. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003;134:1382–1390. - PubMed
-
- Krämer N, Reinelt C, Richter G, Petschelt A, Frankenberger R.Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in Class II cavities: Clinical results and margin analysis after four years Dent Mater 2009. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2008.12.003. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources