Dsj D'Souza1, M Kumar2. 1. Commanding Officer, 200 Military Dental Centre, C/o 56 APO, Pune-40. 2. Reader (Dept of Dental Surgery), AFMC, Pune-40.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Advances in modern dental materials provide patients with a choice of natural looking veneers to provide esthetic restorations. These may be directly fabricated composite resin veneers or indirectly fabricated veneers. This study was carried out to evaluate the clinical effect of new generation indirect veneering composites and to compare them with veneers fabricated from direct composite restorations. METHODS: The present study was carried out in the Prosthodontics department of a medical college. A total of forty patients requiring restoration of the anterior teeth using composite veneers were selected and either of the two materials was used to fabricate the veneers. RESULT: Clinical evaluation was done for esthetics and periodontal health. Statistical analysis showed that there were no significant changes to the periodontal health during the period of the study. CONCLUSION: The evidence obtained from this study indicates that both direct as well as indirect composite materials had clinically acceptable outcomes in terms of restoration of esthetics. Biocompatibility with the periodontal tissues of both materials was also evident by the improvement in oral health indices used in the study.
BACKGROUND: Advances in modern dental materials provide patients with a choice of natural looking veneers to provide esthetic restorations. These may be directly fabricated composite resin veneers or indirectly fabricated veneers. This study was carried out to evaluate the clinical effect of new generation indirect veneering composites and to compare them with veneers fabricated from direct composite restorations. METHODS: The present study was carried out in the Prosthodontics department of a medical college. A total of forty patients requiring restoration of the anterior teeth using composite veneers were selected and either of the two materials was used to fabricate the veneers. RESULT: Clinical evaluation was done for esthetics and periodontal health. Statistical analysis showed that there were no significant changes to the periodontal health during the period of the study. CONCLUSION: The evidence obtained from this study indicates that both direct as well as indirect composite materials had clinically acceptable outcomes in terms of restoration of esthetics. Biocompatibility with the periodontal tissues of both materials was also evident by the improvement in oral health indices used in the study.