Literature DB >> 35556174

Randomized prospective clinical trial of class II restorations using flowable bulk-fill resin composites: 4-year follow-up.

Isis Almela Endo Hoshino1, André Luiz Fraga Briso1, Lara Maria Bueno Esteves1, Paulo Henrique Dos Santos2, Sandra Meira Borghi Frascino1, Ticiane Cestari Fagundes3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This randomized, prospective, and split-mouth study aimed to evaluate flowable bulk-fill resin composites in class II restorations, comparing it with a conventional layering technique after 4-year follow-up.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-three subjects received three class II restorations according to the restorative systems: conventional microhybrid composite resin (PA - Peak Universal + Amelogen Plus, Ultradent); flowable bulk-fill and nanoparticulate composite resins (ABF - Adper Single Bond 2 + Filtek Bulk Fill Flow + Filtek Z350XT, 3M/Espe); and flowable bulk-fill and microhybrid composite resins, (XST - XP Bond + SDR + TPH3, Dentsply). The clinical performance and interproximal contacts were evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier, equality test of two proportions, Friedman, Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney, and Logistic regression analysis tests (alpha = 0.05).
RESULTS: In total, 106 restorations were evaluated at 4 years. Both systems with bulk-fill composites presented higher marginal discoloration than PA. About surface texture, ABF restorative system showed superior bravo scores being statistically similar to XST. Better performance for wear and surface staining was found for XST restorative system. All restorative systems resulted in the decreased interproximal contacts, occurring early for XST.
CONCLUSIONS: The restorative systems that used flowable bulk-fill resin composites showed satisfactory clinical performance compared with conventional resin composite after 4 years. All restorative systems had decreased proximal contact after 4 years. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Initial marginal discoloration was observed in more than 50% of class II restorations performed with restorative systems that used flowable bulk-fill resin composite. All restorative systems had decreased proximal contact strength over time.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adhesive systems; Class II; Clinical trials; Resin composite

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35556174     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-022-04526-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.606


  39 in total

1.  Influence of volumetric shrinkage and curing light intensity on proximal contact tightness of class II resin composite restorations: in vitro study.

Authors:  H El-Shamy; M H Saber; C E Dörfer; W El-Badrawy; B A C Loomans
Journal:  Oper Dent       Date:  2012-02-07       Impact factor: 2.440

2.  Effect of different curing protocols on the mechanical properties of low-viscosity bulk-fill composites.

Authors:  Nicoleta Ilie; Katharina Stark
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2014-05-25       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Use of Transparent Tips for Obtaining Tight Proximal Contacts in Direct Class II Composite Resin Restorations.

Authors:  V Alonso; M Caserio; I L Darriba
Journal:  Oper Dent       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 2.440

4.  Posterior composites: Update on cavities and filling techniques.

Authors:  J Sabbagh; R J McConnell; M Clancy McConnell
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Randomized 36-month follow-up of posterior bulk-filled resin composite restorations.

Authors:  A D Loguercio; M Rezende; M F Gutierrez; T F Costa; A Armas-Vega; A Reis
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  24-Month Clinical Evaluation of Different Bulk-Fill Restorative Resins in Class II Restorations.

Authors:  T Guney; A R Yazici
Journal:  Oper Dent       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 2.440

Review 7.  Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials.

Authors:  Flávio F Demarco; Marcos B Corrêa; Maximiliano S Cenci; Rafael R Moraes; Niek J M Opdam
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 5.304

8.  Bulk-fill versus layering pure ormocer posterior restorations: A randomized split-mouth clinical trial.

Authors:  Carlos Rg Torres; Ana Lb Jurema; Mauricio Yde Souza; Rebeca Di Nicoló; Alessandra B Borges
Journal:  Am J Dent       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 1.522

9.  A Two-year Clinical Comparison of Three Different Restorative Materials in Class II Cavities.

Authors:  H Balkaya; S Arslan
Journal:  Oper Dent       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 2.440

10.  Meta-analysis of the clinical behavior of posterior direct resin restorations: Low polymerization shrinkage resin in comparison to methacrylate composite resin.

Authors:  Paula de Castro Kruly; Marcelo Giannini; Renata Corrêa Pascotto; Laíse Midori Tokubo; Uhana Seifert Guimarães Suga; Any de Castro Ruiz Marques; Raquel Sano Suga Terada
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.