Anterior Z250 resin composite restorations: one-year evaluation of clinical performance

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of direct resin composite restorations (Tetric Ceram-TC) and indirect composite inlays (Targis-TG) after 12 months. Methods and Materials Seventy-six Class I and II restorations (44 direct and 32 indirect) were inserted in premolars and molars with carious lesions or deficient restorations in 30 healthy patients according to the manufacturer's instructions. Each restoration was evaluated at baseline and after 12 months according to the modified USPHS criteria for color match (CM), marginal discoloration (MD), secondary caries (SC), anatomic form (AF), surface texture (ST), marginal integrity (MI), and pulp sensitivity (PS). Data were analyzed by Fisher and McNemar Chisquare tests. Results No secondary caries and no pulpal sensitivity were observed after 12 months. However, significant changes in marginal discoloration (MD) criteria could be detected between baseline and one-year results for both materials (p<0.05). For marginal integrity (MI) criteria, the differences between baseline and oneyear recall were statistically significant (p<0.05). For marginal integrity (MI) criteria, Tetric Ceram (TC) showed results statistically superior to Targis (TG) in both observation periods (p<0.05). No statistically significant changes in color match (CM), anatomic form (AF), or surface texture (ST) appeared during the observation periods (p>0.05). Conclusions Direct resin composite restorations performed better than indirect composite inlays for marginal integrity, but all restorations were judged to be clinically acceptable. Clinical Significance Tetric Ceram direct restorations and Targis indirect inlays in posterior teeth provide satisfactory clinical performance and the comparison between them showed little difference after one year. Citation Mendonça JS, Neto RG, Santiago SL, Lauris JRP, Navarro MFL, Carvalho RM. Direct Resin Composite Restorations versus Indirect Composite Inlays: One-Year Results. J Contemp Dent Pract [Internet]. 2010 May; 11(3):025-032. Available from: http://www.thejcdp.com/journal/ view/volume11-issue3-santiago.

Download Full-text

Two-year clinical performance of glass ionomer and resin composite restorations in xerostomic head- and neck-irradiated cancer patients

Clinical Oral Investigations ◽

10.1007/s00784-009-0355-4 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 15 (1) ◽

pp. 31-38 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

Author(s):

Roeland J. G. De Moor ◽

Inge G. Stassen ◽

Yoke van ’t Veldt ◽

Dries Torbeyns ◽

Geert M. G. Hommez

Keyword(s):

Head And Neck ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Clinical Performance ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Glass Ionomer ◽

Composite Restorations

Download Full-text

Clinical Comparison of Bur- and Laser-prepared Minimally Invasive Occlusal Resin Composite Restorations: Two-year Follow-up

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/09-339-c ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 35 (5) ◽

pp. 500-507 ◽

Cited By ~ 18

Author(s):

A. R. Yazici ◽

M. Baseren ◽

J. Gorucu

Keyword(s):

Minimally Invasive ◽

Clinical Relevance ◽

Clinical Performance ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Promising Alternative ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Clinical Comparison ◽

Prepared Composite

Clinical Relevance The laser could be a promising alternative for minimally invasive occlusal resin composite cavity preparations, as its clinical performance was similar to bur-prepared composite restorations.

Download Full-text

In Vivo Chlorhexidine Stabilization of Hybrid Layers of an Acetone-based Dentin Adhesive

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/08-103 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 34 (4) ◽

pp. 379-383 ◽

Cited By ~ 49

Author(s):

M. G. Brackett ◽

F. R. Tay ◽

W. W. Brackett ◽

A. Dib ◽

F. A. Dipp ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Relevance ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Class I ◽

Chlorhexidine Digluconate ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Extensive Degradation ◽

One Year ◽

Hybrid Layers ◽

Dentin Adhesive

Clinical Relevance Extensive degradation of dentin hybrid layers formed with an acetone-based dentin adhesive beneath Class I resin composite restorations was evident after one year unless the teeth received an application of 2% chlorhexidine digluconate after etching.

Download Full-text

Clinical performance of laminate and non-laminate resin composite restorations: a systematic review

Australian Dental Journal ◽

10.1111/adj.12252 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 60 (4) ◽

pp. 520-527 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

KV Nguyen ◽

C Sathorn ◽

RH Wong ◽

MF Burrow

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Performance ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Composite Restorations

Download Full-text

Clinical performance of laminate and non-laminate resin composite restorations: a systematic review

Australian Dental Journal ◽

10.1111/adj.12378 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 60 (4) ◽

pp. 540-540

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Clinical Performance ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Composite Restorations

Download Full-text

Repair of Dimethacrylate-Based Composite Restorations by a Silorane-Based Composite: A One-Year Randomized Clinical Trial

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/11-121-c ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 37 (5) ◽

pp. E13-E22 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

DAV Popoff ◽

TTA Santa Rosa ◽

RC Ferreira ◽

CS Magalhães ◽

AN Moreira ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Composite Resin ◽

Clinical Performance ◽

Controlled Clinical Trial ◽

Shrinkage Stress ◽

Clinical Criteria ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Composite Resin Restorations ◽

One Year ◽

The One

SUMMARY Purpose To investigate clinical performance of a low-shrinkage silorane-based composite resin when used for repairing conventional dimethacrylate-based composite restorations. Background Despite the continued development of resin-based materials, polymerization shrinkage and shrinkage stress still require improvement. A silorane-based monomer system was recently made available for dental restorations. This report refers to the use of this material for making repairs and evaluates the clinical performance of this alternative treatment. Materials and Methods One operator repaired the defective dimethacrylate-based composite resin restorations that were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: control (n=50) repair with Adper SE Plus (3M/ESPE) and Filtek P60 Posterior Restorative (3M/ESPE), and test (n=50) repair with P90 System Adhesive Self-Etch Primer and Bond (3M/ESPE) and Filtek P90 Low Shrink Posterior Restorative (3M/ESPE). After one week, restorations were finished and polished. Two calibrated examiners (Kw≥0.78) evaluated all repaired restorations, blindly and independently, at baseline and one year. The parameters examined were marginal adaptation, anatomic form, surface roughness, marginal discoloration, postoperative sensitivity, and secondary caries. The restorations were classified as Alpha, Bravo, or Charlie, according to modified US Public Health Service criteria. Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon tests were used to compare the groups. Results Of the 100 restorations repaired in this study, 93 were reexamined at baseline. Dropout from baseline to one-year recall was 11%. No statistically significant differences were found between the materials for all clinical criteria, at baseline or at one-year recall (p>0.05). No statistically significant differences were registered (p>0.05) for each material when compared for all clinical criteria at baseline and at one-year recall. Conclusions The hypothesis tested in this randomized controlled clinical trial was accepted. After the one-year evaluations, the silorane-based composite exhibited a similar performance compared with dimethacrylate-based composite when used to make repairs.

Download Full-text

Clinical Evaluation of Self-etch and Total-etch Adhesive Systems in Noncarious Cervical Lesions: A Two-year Report

Operative Dentistry ◽

10.2341/12-355-cr ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 38 (5) ◽

pp. 477-487 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

JO Burgess ◽

R Sadid-Zadeh ◽

D Cakir ◽

LC Ramp

Keyword(s):

Clinical Performance ◽

Resin Composite ◽

Single Bond ◽

Cervical Lesions ◽

Dental Adhesive ◽

Chronic Periodontal Disease ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Salivary Function ◽

One Year ◽

Self Etch

SUMMARY Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical performance of two self-etch dental adhesives with Single Bond Plus, a traditional one-bottle total-etch dental adhesive, for the restoration of noncarious cervical lesions. Materials and Methods: A total of 156 restorations were placed in noncarious cervical lesions with a minimum depth of 1.5 mm. Patients had no chronic periodontal disease and had normal salivary function. Each patient received restorations on three teeth, each bonded with either Adper Single Bond Plus, Adper Easy Bond, or Adper Scotchbond SE dental adhesive. All lesions were restored with Filtek Supreme Plus composite resin. All teeth were isolated with a rubber dam, received a short enamel bevel, and were cleaned with flour of pumice. The adhesives and resin composite were applied following the manufacturers' instructions. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, six months, one year, and two years using modified US Public Health Service criteria. Results: Two-year retention was recorded as 97.3%, 90.5%, and 95.2%, for Single Bond Plus, Scotchbond SE, and Easy Bond, respectively. Statistical analysis did not show a significant difference (p>0.05) in clinical performance between any of the three adhesives after a period of two years.

Download Full-text