Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Mar 24:24:77-86.
doi: 10.3290/j.jad.b2838105.

Clinical Performance of Direct Composite Restorations in Patients with Amelogenesis Imperfecta - Anterior Restorations

Clinical Performance of Direct Composite Restorations in Patients with Amelogenesis Imperfecta - Anterior Restorations

Neslihan Tekçe et al. J Adhes Dent. .

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical performance of direct composite restorations using nanohybrid and nanofill composite materials in anterior teeth in patients with amelogenesis imperfecta (AI).

Materials and methods: The study included 15 patients with AI aged 14-30 years. During the study, the patients received anterior direct composite laminate veneer restorations using either a nanohybrid (Clearfil Majesty ES-2 and Clearfil Universal Bond, Kuraray Noritake) or a nanofill resin composite (Filtek Ultimate Universal Restorative and Single Bond Universal Adhesive, 3M Oral Care). The restorations were evaluated according to the modified USPHS criteria at baseline and at 1-, 2-, 3- and 4-year follow-up periods.

Results: The cumulative success rate of anterior restorations was 80.5% for nanohybrid and 92.5% for nanofill composite after 4 years. Eight restorations with nanohybrid and three restorations with nanofill resin composites failed. Ten restorations failed due to fracture; the fracture rate was 12.3%. Statistically significant differences were found between nanohybrid and nanofill composites regarding marginal discoloration and surface texture after 3 years. Furthermore, statistically significant differences were observed with respect to color match after 4 years.

Conclusion: The use of a nanohybrid or nanofill composite for anterior direct restorations in patients with AI was observed to be satisfactory, based on the rate of ideal and clinically acceptable restorations. The primary reason for restoration failure was fracture. The failure rate of nanohybrid composite restorations was higher than with nanofill composite restorations with respect to survival and marginal adaptation criteria.

Keywords: amelogenesis imperfecta; composite resin; dental enamel; dental restoration; prospective study.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.
Fig 2
Fig 2
Flow diagram describing the history of the restorations.
Fig 3
Fig 3
Clinical appearance after 3 years with failure (fracture).
Fig 4
Fig 4
Intraoral view of composite laminate veneers on anterior teeth. a: baseline; b: 24 h; c: 1 year; d: 2 years; e: 3 years; f: 4 years.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Agackiran E, Tumen EC, Celenk S, Bolgul B, Atakul F. Restoring aesthetics and function in a young boy with hypomature amelogenesis imperfecta: a case report. ISRN Dent. 2011;2011:586854. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Akin H, Tasveren S, Yeler DY. Interdisciplinary approach to treating a patient with amelogenesis imperfecta: a clinical report. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2007;19:131–135. discussion 136. - PubMed
    1. Barnes DM, Blank LW, Gingell JC, Gilner PP. A clinical evaluation of a resin-modified. Glass ionomer restorative material. J Am Dent Assoc. 1995;126:1245–1253. - PubMed
    1. Chen CF, Hu JC, Estrella MR, Peters MC, Bresciani E. Assessment of restorative treatment of patients with amelogenesis imperfecta. Pediatr Dent. 2013;35:337–342. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Crawford PJ, Aldred M, Bloch-Zupan A. Amelogenesis imperfecta. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2007;2:17. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources