Edina Lempel1, Bálint Viktor Lovász2, Réka Meszarics2, Sára Jeges3, Ákos Tóth3, József Szalma4. 1. Department of Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary. Electronic address: lempel.edina@pte.hu. 2. Department of Restorative Dentistry and Periodontology, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary. 3. Faculty of Sciences, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary. 4. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study evaluated the survival rate of anterior direct resin based composite (RBC) build-ups in vital teeth made of microhybrid and nanofill RBC materials and the influence of bruxism, beverage consumption and smoking on the long-term performance of restorations. METHODS: Patients receiving anterior restoration between 2006 and 2011, with the diagnosis of fracture or diastema, were selected. A total of 65 adult patients (mean age: 25.2) with 163 restorations (78 Filtek Supreme XT and 85 Enamel Plus HFO) were evaluated using the USPHS criteria. Data were analyzed with Fisher's Exact Test, Extended Cox-regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Mean observation period was 7.2 (±1.4) years and the mean annual failure rate for this period was 1.43%. The reasons of failures included restoration fracture and color mismatch. Nanofill restorations had significantly higher rate of color mismatch (p=0.002), microhybrids more frequently failed in fracture of restoration (p=0.034). The overall difference in potential hazard of using Enamel Plus HFO or Filtek Supreme XT was not significant (p=0.704). Chipping or fracture of the restoration was more frequent in the first year after placement (p=0.036), while beverage consumption was significantly correlated with discoloration of the restorations (p=0.005). SIGNIFICANCE: The application of direct RBC restorations provides an excellent treatment option for fractured teeth and for closing diastemas. The overall survival rate was 88.34% up to 10 years. Microhybrid and nanofill RBC restorations showed similar survival rates, however nanofills discolored at a higher rate, meanwhile chipping of the restoration occurred frequently with microhybrids.
OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study evaluated the survival rate of anterior direct resin based composite (RBC) build-ups in vital teeth made of microhybrid and nanofill RBC materials and the influence of bruxism, beverage consumption and smoking on the long-term performance of restorations. METHODS:Patients receiving anterior restoration between 2006 and 2011, with the diagnosis of fracture or diastema, were selected. A total of 65 adult patients (mean age: 25.2) with 163 restorations (78 Filtek Supreme XT and 85 Enamel Plus HFO) were evaluated using the USPHS criteria. Data were analyzed with Fisher's Exact Test, Extended Cox-regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Mean observation period was 7.2 (±1.4) years and the mean annual failure rate for this period was 1.43%. The reasons of failures included restoration fracture and color mismatch. Nanofill restorations had significantly higher rate of color mismatch (p=0.002), microhybrids more frequently failed in fracture of restoration (p=0.034). The overall difference in potential hazard of using Enamel Plus HFO or Filtek Supreme XT was not significant (p=0.704). Chipping or fracture of the restoration was more frequent in the first year after placement (p=0.036), while beverage consumption was significantly correlated with discoloration of the restorations (p=0.005). SIGNIFICANCE: The application of direct RBC restorations provides an excellent treatment option for fractured teeth and for closing diastemas. The overall survival rate was 88.34% up to 10 years. Microhybrid and nanofill RBC restorations showed similar survival rates, however nanofills discolored at a higher rate, meanwhile chipping of the restoration occurred frequently with microhybrids.
Authors: Françoise H van de Sande; Rafael R Moraes; Raquel V Elias; Anelise F Montagner; Paulo A Rodolpho; Flávio F Demarco; Maximiliano S Cenci Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2018-10-27 Impact factor: 3.573