Evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin composites in Class I restorations: three-year results of a randomized, double-blind and controlled clinical trial
- PMID: 20166406
- DOI: 10.2341/09-027CR
Evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin composites in Class I restorations: three-year results of a randomized, double-blind and controlled clinical trial
Abstract
The clinical performance of packable and conventional hybrid resin composites in Class I restorations for a period of three years was compared using a randomized controlled double-blind clinical trial with self-matching design. A total of 50 pairs of Class I restorations were placed in 32 adult patients by one dentist in a self-matching prospective clinical trial. The paired teeth were divided into the TPH Spectrum/XenoIII (TS) restoration group and the Synergy Compact/One Coat (SC) restoration group according to a random number table. Application of the materials followed the manufacturer's instructions. The restorations were evaluated by two independent evaluators using US Public Health Service (USPHS)-Ryge modified criteria. Statistical analysis was performed using the McNemar's test with Yates' continuity correction. After three years, 40 pairs of restorations were available for evaluation. Four TS and two SC restorations failed due to fracture. Only one TS-restored tooth showed postoperative sensitivity at baseline and the symptom disappeared one week later. Alpha ratings of TS vs SC restorations were as follows: 95% vs 98% for color match, 85% vs 88% for marginal integrity, 88% vs 90% for anatomical form, 85% vs 83% for marginal discoloration, 88% vs 93% for occlusal contact. For both materials, Alpha ratings were 88% for surface texture. The three-year clinical performances of the two restorative materials were satisfactory and not significantly different for each of the parameters evaluated.
Similar articles
-
Six-year clinical evaluation of packable composite restorations.Oper Dent. 2009 Jan-Feb;34(1):11-7. doi: 10.2341/08-48. Oper Dent. 2009. PMID: 19192832 Clinical Trial.
-
Two-year clinical evaluation of four polyacid-modified resin composites and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement in Class V lesions.Quintessence Int. 2002 Jul-Aug;33(7):542-8. Quintessence Int. 2002. PMID: 12165991 Clinical Trial.
-
Direct resin composite restorations versus indirect composite inlays: one-year results.J Contemp Dent Pract. 2010 May 1;11(3):025-32. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2010. PMID: 20461321
-
Clinical effectiveness of direct anterior restorations--a meta-analysis.Dent Mater. 2015 May;31(5):481-95. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2015.01.015. Epub 2015 Mar 13. Dent Mater. 2015. PMID: 25773188 Review.
-
Dental Materials: What Goes Where? Class V Restorations.Dent Update. 2015 Nov;42(9):829-30, 833-6, 839. doi: 10.12968/denu.2015.42.9.829. Dent Update. 2015. PMID: 26749791 Review.
Cited by
-
Multifactorial Contributors to the Longevity of Dental Restorations: An Integrated Review of Related Factors.Dent J (Basel). 2024 Sep 12;12(9):291. doi: 10.3390/dj12090291. Dent J (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39329857 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Compliance of randomized controlled trials in posterior restorations with the CONSORT statement: a systematic review of methodology.Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Jan;26(1):41-64. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-04198-8. Epub 2021 Sep 30. Clin Oral Investig. 2022. PMID: 34595606
-
Dental cavity liners for Class I and Class II resin-based composite restorations.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 5;3(3):CD010526. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010526.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. PMID: 30834516 Free PMC article.
-
Dental cavity liners for Class I and Class II resin-based composite restorations.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 25;10(10):CD010526. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010526.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 05;3:CD010526. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010526.pub3. PMID: 27780315 Free PMC article. Updated.
-
Eight-year randomized clinical evaluation of Class II nanohybrid resin composite restorations bonded with a one-step self-etch or a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive.Clin Oral Investig. 2015 Jul;19(6):1371-9. doi: 10.1007/s00784-014-1345-8. Epub 2014 Oct 31. Clin Oral Investig. 2015. PMID: 25359327 Clinical Trial.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources