Literature DB >> 16268391

Clinical evaluation of a flowable resin composite and flowable compomer for preventive resin restorations.

Man Qin1, HongSheng Liu.   

Abstract

This clinical study evaluated the retention and caries protection of a flowable resin composite (Flow Line) and a flowable compomer (Dyract Flow) used in preventive resin restorations as compared to the conventional preventive resin technique which uses a resin composite (Brilliant) and a sealant (Concise). This study observed 205 permanent molars with small carious cavities less than 1.5 mm in width, which were obtained from 165 children aged 7 to 15 years. Flowable resin composite was used to treat 75 teeth, and 71 teeth were treated with flowable compomer in both cavities and caries-free fissures. For the control group, 59 teeth were treated with resin composite in cavities and sealant in caries-free fissures. The teeth were evaluated at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24-month intervals. After three months, all 205 treated teeth were completely intact. After six months, 66 of the 71 teeth treated with flowable resin composite and 65 of the 70 teeth treated with flowable compomer were complete, compared to 57 of the 58 teeth treated with the conventional preventive resin technique. After 12 months, 60 of the 67 teeth treated with flowable resin composite and 61 of the 67 teeth treated with flowable compomer were complete, compared to 51 of the 55 teeth treated with the conventional preventive resin technique. After 18 months, 53 of the 61 teeth treated with flowable resin composite and 54 of the 62 teeth treated with flowable compomer were complete, compared to 47 of the 53 teeth treated with the conventional preventive resin technique. After 24 months, 49 of the 58 teeth treated with flowable resin composite and 45 of the 57 teeth treated with flowable compomer were complete, compared to 42 of the 52 teeth treated with the conventional preventive resin technique. There were no statistically significant differences in retention rates among all groups after 3, 6, 12, 18 or 24-months (p>0.05). One tooth treated with flowable resin composite and one tooth treated with flowable compomer developed caries after 18 and 24 months, respectively, resulting from partial loss at "caries-free fissures." Five teeth developed caries in the conventional preventive resin group; one after 12 months, two after 18 months and one after 24 months, due to loss at cavities. The final caries occurred after 24 months, resulting from partial loss at "caries-free fissures." The differences in caries development among the three groups were not statistically significant (p>0.05). This study suggested that flowable resin composite and flowable compomer could be used for preventive resin restorations. Meanwhile, a vigilant recall should be followed-up due to the risk of failure for flowable materials in "caries-free" fissures. The repair should be performed immediately, in case the preventive resin restoration develops a fracture or loss.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16268391

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oper Dent        ISSN: 0361-7734            Impact factor:   2.440


  7 in total

Review 1.  Flowable Resin Composites: A Systematic Review and Clinical Considerations.

Authors:  Kusai Baroudi; Jean C Rodrigues
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2015-06-01

Review 2.  Flowable composite as fissure sealing material? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  A Bagherian; A Sarraf Shirazi
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 1.626

3.  An in vitro microleakage study of class V cavities restored with a new self-adhesive flowable composite resin versus different flowable materials.

Authors:  Mostafa Sadeghi
Journal:  Dent Res J (Isfahan)       Date:  2012-07

4.  Does the use of a novel self-adhesive flowable composite reduce nanoleakage?

Authors:  Abeer Abo El Naga; Mohammed Yousef; Rasha Ramadan; Sherif Fayez Bahgat; Lana Alshawwa
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2015-03-27

5.  Evaluation of marginal sealing ability of self-adhesive flowable composite resin in Class II composite restoration: An in vitro study.

Authors:  Preeti Mishra; Shikha Jaiswal; Vineeta Nikhil; Sachin Gupta; Padmanabh Jha; Shalya Raj
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2018 Jul-Aug

6.  Comparative Evaluation of Retention and Antibacterial Efficacy of Compomer and Glass Hybrid Bulk Fill Restorative Material as a Conservative Adhesive Restoration in Children with Mixed Dentition-An In Vivo Two-arm Parallel-group Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Study.

Authors:  Madhura V Mundada; Shivayogi M Hugar; Seema Hallikerimath; Rucha Davalbhakta; Niraj S Gokhale; Shreyas V Shah
Journal:  Int J Clin Pediatr Dent       Date:  2020

7.  Fissure sealant materials: Wear resistance of flowable composite resins.

Authors:  Sohrab Asefi; Solmaz Eskandarion; Shadi Hamidiaval
Journal:  J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects       Date:  2016-08-17
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.