Literature DB >> 9002789

2-year clinical evaluation of Class I posterior composites.

A I Abdalla1, H A Alhadainy.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To clinically evaluate different brands of resin composites in Class I restorations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 120 Class I cavities were prepared in permanent molars and restored with four posterior resin composites: Clearfil Photo Posterior, Z100, Herculite XR, and Heliomolar RO. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 1 and 2 years using the USPHS criteria.
RESULTS: After 1 year, Z100 restorations were rated Alfa in all tested criteria. Clearfil PP, Herculite XR and Heliomolar RO showed slight changes in color match, anatomic form, and marginal adaptation. After 2 years, no significant difference was found in the evaluation of cavosurface discoloration for all tested materials. Z100 and Herculite XR were significantly more color stable than Clearfil PP and Heliomolar RO. The anatomic form evaluation showed Z100 with a significantly higher value than other groups. Heliomolar RO revealed the lowest percentage of marginal adaptation.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 9002789

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Dent        ISSN: 0894-8275            Impact factor:   1.522


  8 in total

1.  Mechanical performance of novel bioactive glass containing dental restorative composites.

Authors:  D Khvostenko; J C Mitchell; T J Hilton; J L Ferracane; J J Kruzic
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 5.304

2.  Clinical evaluation of two packable posterior composites: 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  T C Fagundes; T J E Barata; E Bresciani; D F G Cefaly; M F F Jorge; M F L Navarro
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2006-07-06       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 3.  Compliance of randomized controlled trials in posterior restorations with the CONSORT statement: a systematic review of methodology.

Authors:  Márcia Rezende; Ana Cristina Rodrigues Martins; Jadson Araújo da Silva; Alessandra Reis; Juliana Larocca de Geus
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-09-30       Impact factor: 3.606

4.  Clinical evaluation of two "packable" posterior composite resins: two-year results.

Authors:  L G Lopes; D F G Cefaly; E B Franco; R F L Mondelli; J R P Lauris; M F L Navarro
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2003-08-12       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner.

Authors:  Claus-Peter Ernst; Kerem Canbek; Kadir Aksogan; Brita Willershausen
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2003-07-29       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth.

Authors:  A Brunthaler; F König; T Lucas; W Sperr; A Schedle
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2003-05-27       Impact factor: 3.573

7.  Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations: 12-month results.

Authors:  Cigdem Celik; Neslihan Arhun; Kivanc Yamanel
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2010-01

8.  Comparison of the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth restored with prefabricated posts and composite resin cores with different post lengths.

Authors:  Accácio Lins do Valle; Jefferson Ricardo Pereira; Fábio Kenji Shiratori; Luiz Fernando Pegoraro; Gerson Bonfante
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 2.698

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.