Literature DB >> 12898294

Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner.

Claus-Peter Ernst1, Kerem Canbek, Kadir Aksogan, Brita Willershausen.   

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a packable fine hybrid dental composite (Prodigy Condensable) and the influence of the additional application of a flowable resin composite (Revolution, SDS Kerr) layer on marginal integrity after 2 years in stress-bearing posterior cavities according to the Ryge criteria. In 50 patients (40.5+/-17.5 years of age), 116 class II fillings (metal matrix system, glass ionomer-cement-base in 36%, rubberdam isolation in 70%) were placed, with at least two restorations per patient. The adhesive Optibond Solo Plus was used for all the restorations. In one of the two fillings in each patient, an additional layer of the flowable composite Revolution was applied in the entire cavity and separately light-cured. Baseline scores have been rated Alfa in > or =95% and Bravo in <5%. After 2 years, the results [%] of the Ryge evaluation for the two groups with/without the additional use of Revolution were: (1) Marginal Adaptation: Alfa:78/70, Bravo:16/27, Charlie:0/0, Delta:6/4; (2) Anatomic Form: Alfa:89/95, Bravo:6/2, Charlie:6/4; (3) Secondary Caries: Alfa:98/100, Bravo:2/0; (4) Marginal Discoloration: Alfa:76/68, Bravo:24/32, Charlie:0/0; (5) Surface: Alfa:90/91, Bravo:4/5, Charlie:0/0, Delta:6/4; (6) Color Match: Oscar:56/57, Alfa:44/39, Bravo:0/4, Charlie:0/0. Within the observation period (recall rate: 95%), three restorations out of 116 at baseline fractured, one restoration showed a secondary caries, one tooth received endodontic treatment, and all other restored teeth remained vital. After 2 years, no statistically significant difference (Chi-square test) in the overall survival rate between the group with the additional use of Revolution (92.8%) and that without Revolution (94.6%) was found. The combined survival rate for both groups together was 93.7% of clinically acceptable restorations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12898294     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-003-0220-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  33 in total

Review 1.  The new posterior resins and a simplified placement technique.

Authors:  R D Jackson; M Morgan
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 3.634

Review 2.  A review of condensable composite.

Authors:  A Hoang; S Koh; R Bebermeyer; C Johnson
Journal:  J Gt Houst Dent Soc       Date:  1999-09

3.  Effects of composite thickness on the shear bond strength to dentin.

Authors:  R B Price; G Doyle; D Murphy
Journal:  J Can Dent Assoc       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 1.316

4.  Physical properties of three packable resin-composite restorative materials.

Authors:  W P Kelsey; M A Latta; R S Shaddy; C M Stanislav
Journal:  Oper Dent       Date:  2000 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.440

5.  Clinical performance of a packable resin composite for posterior teeth after 3 years.

Authors:  C P Ernst; M Martin; S Stuff; B Willershausen
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Marginal integrity related to bond strength and strain capacity of composite resin restorative systems.

Authors:  C M Kemp-Scholte; C L Davidson
Journal:  J Prosthet Dent       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 3.426

7.  Using flowable composites in direct posterior restorations.

Authors:  M C Prager
Journal:  Dent Today       Date:  1997-07

8.  2-year clinical evaluation of Class I posterior composites.

Authors:  A I Abdalla; H A Alhadainy
Journal:  Am J Dent       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 1.522

9.  The extent of polymerization of Class II light-cured composite resin restorations; effects of incremental placement technique, exposure time and heating for resin inlays.

Authors:  S Hirabayashi; J A Hood; T Hirasawa
Journal:  Dent Mater J       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  Clinical criteria.

Authors:  G Ryge
Journal:  Int Dent J       Date:  1980-12       Impact factor: 2.512

View more
  13 in total

1.  Seven-year clinical performance of CEREC-2 all-ceramic CAD/CAM restorations placed within deeply destroyed teeth.

Authors:  Matthias J Roggendorf; Bianka Kunzi; Johannes Ebert; Hubert C Roggendorf; Roland Frankenberger; Sven M Reich
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  In vivo interfacial adaptation of class II resin composite restorations with and without a flowable resin composite liner.

Authors:  Anders Lindberg; J W V van Dijken; P Hörstedt
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2005-04-07       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Investigations on mechanical behaviour of dental composites.

Authors:  Nicoleta Ilie; Reinhard Hickel
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2009-02-26       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Three-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial of the posterior composite QuiXfil in class I and II cavities.

Authors:  Juergen Manhart; Hong-Yan Chen; Reinhard Hickel
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2008-11-08       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Clinical evaluation of two packable posterior composites: 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  T C Fagundes; T J E Barata; E Bresciani; D F G Cefaly; M F F Jorge; M F L Navarro
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2006-07-06       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Dental cavity liners for Class I and Class II resin-based composite restorations.

Authors:  Andrew B Schenkel; Analia Veitz-Keenan
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-03-05

7.  Clinical performance of a nanofilled resin composite with and without an intermediary layer of flowable composite: a 2-year evaluation.

Authors:  Sebastian Stefanski; Jan W V van Dijken
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-11-23       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 8.  Dental cavity liners for Class I and Class II resin-based composite restorations.

Authors:  Andrew B Schenkel; Ivy Peltz; Analia Veitz-Keenan
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-10-25

9.  Fracture strength of extended class I composite restorations with different restorative techniques.

Authors:  Brenda S Leyton; Rodrigo N Rached; Sergio A Ignácio; Evelise M Souza
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2021-09-14       Impact factor: 2.634

10.  Preliminary clinical evaluation of short fiber-reinforced composite resin in posterior teeth: 12-months report.

Authors:  S Garoushi; J Tanner; Pk Vallittu; L Lassila
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2012-01-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.