Begüm Güray Efes1, Can Dörter, Yavuz Gömeç. 1. Istanbul University, Faculty of Dentistry, Dept. of Operative Dentistry, 34390, Capa, Istanbul, Turkey. begumguray@yahoo.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the 2-year clinical performance of an ormocer, a new nanofill composite and as a control a conventional hybrid composite restorations in small Class I cavities of permanent molars. METHODS: 90 Class I maxillary cavities were prepared in 90 patients. Cavities were restored incrementally in oblique layers with ormocer (Admira), nanofill (Filtek Supreme), or hybrid (Renew) composite material. Restorations were examined using the United States Public Health Service modified Ryge criteria at baseline, after 6 months, 1 year and 2 years. The changes in the parameters during the 2-year period were assessed with Friedman test analysis. Comparison of the baseline scores with those at the recall periods was evaluated by Wilcoxon signed rank test; the level of significance was set at P< 0.05. RESULTS: None of the restorative materials exhibited secondary caries or postoperative sensitivity at the 6-month, 1-year or 2-year recall (P> 0.05). After 2 years, except the one failed Admira restoration, no other criteria was clinically unacceptable.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the 2-year clinical performance of an ormocer, a new nanofill composite and as a control a conventional hybrid composite restorations in small Class I cavities of permanent molars. METHODS: 90 Class I maxillary cavities were prepared in 90 patients. Cavities were restored incrementally in oblique layers with ormocer (Admira), nanofill (Filtek Supreme), or hybrid (Renew) composite material. Restorations were examined using the United States Public Health Service modified Ryge criteria at baseline, after 6 months, 1 year and 2 years. The changes in the parameters during the 2-year period were assessed with Friedman test analysis. Comparison of the baseline scores with those at the recall periods was evaluated by Wilcoxon signed rank test; the level of significance was set at P< 0.05. RESULTS: None of the restorative materials exhibited secondary caries or postoperative sensitivity at the 6-month, 1-year or 2-year recall (P> 0.05). After 2 years, except the one failed Admira restoration, no other criteria was clinically unacceptable.